Making an Impact: New Directions for Arts and Humanities Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hazelkorn, Ellen

2015-01-01

The severity of the global economic crisis has put the spotlight firmly on measuring academic and research performance and productivity and assessing its contribution, value, impact and benefit. While, traditionally, research output and impact were measured by peer-publications and citations, there is increased emphasis on a "market-driven…

A Citation Analysis of Western Journals Cited in Taiwan's Library and Information Science and History Research Journals: From a Research Evaluation Perspective

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Huang, Mu-Hsuan; Lin, Chi-Shiou

2011-01-01

This article examines citations of Western journals in eight LIS journals and six history journals published in Taiwan. The findings show that both the Western journals' impact factor values and whether they are included in JCR may not necessarily indicate their real use in Taiwan's LIS and history research--especially in history research.…

[Analysis of citations and national and international impact factor of Farmacia Hospitalaria (2001-2005)].

PubMed

Aleixandre-Benavent, R; González Alcaide, G; Miguel-Dasit, A; González de Dios, J; de Granda Orive, J I; Valderrama Zurián, J C

2007-01-01

The objective of this study is to analyse the citation patterns and impact and immediacy indicators of the Farmacia Hospitalaria journal during the period 2001-2005. An analysis of citations chosen from 101 Spanish health science journals was carried out in order to determine the citing and cited journals and the national and international impact and immediacy indicators. A similar methodology used by Thomson ISI in Science Citation Index (SCI) and Journal Citation Reports (JRC) was applied. Farmacia Hospitalaria made 1,370 citations to 316 different journals. The percentage of self-citations was 9%. The national impact factor increased from 0.178 points in 2001 to 0.663 points in 2005 while the international impact factor increased from 0.178 to 0.806 for the same period. The analysis of citation patterns demonstrates the multidisciplinary nature of Farmacia Hospitalaria and a significant growth in the impact indicators over recent years. These indicators are higher than those of some other pharmacy journals included in Journal Citation Reports. Self-citation was not excessive and was similar to that of other journals.

Multinational teams and diseconomies of scale in collaborative research.

PubMed

Hsiehchen, David; Espinoza, Magdalena; Hsieh, Antony

2015-09-01

Collaborative research has become the mainstay in knowledge production across many domains of science and is widely promoted as a means of cultivating research quality, enhanced resource utilization, and high impact. An accurate appraisal of the value of collaborative research efforts is necessary to inform current funding and research policies. We reveal contemporary trends in collaborative research spanning multiple subject fields, with a particular focus on interactions between nations. We also examined citation outcomes of research teams and confirmed the accumulative benefits of having additional authors and unique countries involved. However, when per capita citation rates were analyzed to disambiguate the effects of authors and countries, decreasing returns in citations were noted with increasing authors among large research teams. In contrast, an increasing number of unique countries had a persistent additive citation effect. We also assessed the placement of foreign authors relative to the first author in paper bylines of biomedical research articles, which demonstrated a significant citation advantage of having an international presence in the second-to-last author position, possibly occupied by foreign primary co-investigators. Our analyses highlight the evolution and functional impact of team dynamics in research and suggest empirical strategies to evaluate team science.

Multinational teams and diseconomies of scale in collaborative research

PubMed Central

Hsiehchen, David; Espinoza, Magdalena; Hsieh, Antony

2015-01-01

Collaborative research has become the mainstay in knowledge production across many domains of science and is widely promoted as a means of cultivating research quality, enhanced resource utilization, and high impact. An accurate appraisal of the value of collaborative research efforts is necessary to inform current funding and research policies. We reveal contemporary trends in collaborative research spanning multiple subject fields, with a particular focus on interactions between nations. We also examined citation outcomes of research teams and confirmed the accumulative benefits of having additional authors and unique countries involved. However, when per capita citation rates were analyzed to disambiguate the effects of authors and countries, decreasing returns in citations were noted with increasing authors among large research teams. In contrast, an increasing number of unique countries had a persistent additive citation effect. We also assessed the placement of foreign authors relative to the first author in paper bylines of biomedical research articles, which demonstrated a significant citation advantage of having an international presence in the second-to-last author position, possibly occupied by foreign primary co-investigators. Our analyses highlight the evolution and functional impact of team dynamics in research and suggest empirical strategies to evaluate team science. PMID:26601251

What is the enduring value of research publications in clinical epilepsy? An assessment of papers published in 1981, 1991, and 2001.

PubMed

Gregoris, Nattanit; Shorvon, Simon

2013-09-01

There has been a rapid expansion in the number of research papers published on clinical epilepsy topics and the number of journals in the medical field. In this expanding publishing environment, the question arises as to how much of the published medical literature has 'enduring value' in terms of advancing knowledge in any significant way. We developed a methodology to assess the enduring value of papers published in the field of clinical epilepsy and established its internal validity. We studied 300 research papers published in 1981, 1991, and 2001 (100 in each year) and assessed their enduring value in four domains: citations in the last year, citations in the last 10years, citations in the standard epilepsy textbook, and a subjective assessment by an experienced epileptologist. Of the 300 papers, 214 (71%) were categorized as having 'no enduring value', and only 11 (4%) were identified as having 'high enduring value'. The 'high enduring value' papers could generally be identified immediately on publication, by high initial citation values, and were also more likely to be published in journals with a high impact factor. The commonest characteristics of a paper with no enduring value were that they reported research that was inherently unimportant (55.6%), not novel (38.8%), or had significant methodological flaws (22.0%). Although there are other reasons for publishing papers, the fact that the great majority of published papers lack enduring value in terms of advancing knowledge should be a concern to the medical and scientific community. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PR-Index: Using the h-Index and PageRank for Determining True Impact.

PubMed

Gao, Chao; Wang, Zhen; Li, Xianghua; Zhang, Zili; Zeng, Wei

2016-01-01

Several technical indicators have been proposed to assess the impact of authors and institutions. Here, we combine the h-index and the PageRank algorithm to do away with some of the individual limitations of these two indices. Most importantly, we aim to take into account value differences between citations-evaluating the citation sources by defining the h-index using the PageRank score rather than with citations. The resulting PR-index is then constructed by evaluating source popularity as well as the source publication authority. Extensive tests on available collections data (i.e., Microsoft Academic Search and benchmarks on the SIGKDD innovation award) show that the PR-index provides a more balanced impact measure than many existing indices. Due to its simplicity and similarity to the popular h-index, the PR-index may thus become a welcome addition to the technical indices already in use. Moreover, growth dynamics prior to the SIGKDD innovation award indicate that the PR-index might have notable predictive power.

PR-Index: Using the h-Index and PageRank for Determining True Impact

PubMed Central

Gao, Chao; Wang, Zhen; Li, Xianghua; Zhang, Zili; Zeng, Wei

2016-01-01

Several technical indicators have been proposed to assess the impact of authors and institutions. Here, we combine the h-index and the PageRank algorithm to do away with some of the individual limitations of these two indices. Most importantly, we aim to take into account value differences between citations-evaluating the citation sources by defining the h-index using the PageRank score rather than with citations. The resulting PR-index is then constructed by evaluating source popularity as well as the source publication authority. Extensive tests on available collections data (i.e., Microsoft Academic Search and benchmarks on the SIGKDD innovation award) show that the PR-index provides a more balanced impact measure than many existing indices. Due to its simplicity and similarity to the popular h-index, the PR-index may thus become a welcome addition to the technical indices already in use. Moreover, growth dynamics prior to the SIGKDD innovation award indicate that the PR-index might have notable predictive power. PMID:27627767

Citation analytics: Data exploration and comparative analyses of CiteScores of Open Access and Subscription-Based publications indexed in Scopus (2014-2016).

PubMed

Atayero, Aderemi A; Popoola, Segun I; Egeonu, Jesse; Oludayo, Olumuyiwa

2018-08-01

Citation is one of the important metrics that are used in measuring the relevance and the impact of research publications. The potentials of citation analytics may be exploited to understand the gains of publishing scholarly peer-reviewed research outputs in either Open Access (OA) sources or Subscription-Based (SB) sources in the bid to increase citation impact. However, relevant data required for such comparative analysis must be freely accessible for evidence-based findings and conclusions. In this data article, citation scores ( CiteScores ) of 2542 OA sources and 15,040 SB sources indexed in Scopus from 2014 to 2016 were presented and analyzed based on a set of five inclusion criteria. A robust dataset, which contains the CiteScores of OA and SB publication sources included, is attached as supplementary material to this data article to facilitate further reuse. Descriptive statistics and frequency distributions of OA CiteScores and SB CiteScores are presented in tables. Boxplot representations and scatter plots are provided to show the statistical distributions of OA CiteScores and SB CiteScores across the three sub-categories (Book Series, Journal, and Trade Journal). Correlation coefficient and p-value matrices are made available within the data article. In addition, Probability Density Functions (PDFs) and Cumulative Distribution Functions (CDFs) of OA CiteScores and SB CiteScores are computed and the results are presented using tables and graphs. Furthermore, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and multiple comparison post-hoc tests are conducted to understand the statistical difference (and its significance, if any) in the citation impact of OA publication sources and SB publication source based on CiteScore . In the long run, the data provided in this article will help policy makers and researchers in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to identify the appropriate publication source type and category for dissemination of scholarly research findings with maximum citation impact.

Long-Distance Interdisciplinarity Leads to Higher Scientific Impact

PubMed Central

Larivière, Vincent; Haustein, Stefanie; Börner, Katy

2015-01-01

Scholarly collaborations across disparate scientific disciplines are challenging. Collaborators are likely to have their offices in another building, attend different conferences, and publish in other venues; they might speak a different scientific language and value an alien scientific culture. This paper presents a detailed analysis of success and failure of interdisciplinary papers—as manifested in the citations they receive. For 9.2 million interdisciplinary research papers published between 2000 and 2012 we show that the majority (69.9%) of co-cited interdisciplinary pairs are “win-win” relationships, i.e., papers that cite them have higher citation impact and there are as few as 3.3% “lose-lose” relationships. Papers citing references from subdisciplines positioned far apart (in the conceptual space of the UCSD map of science) attract the highest relative citation counts. The findings support the assumption that interdisciplinary research is more successful and leads to results greater than the sum of its disciplinary parts. PMID:25822658

Long-distance interdisciplinarity leads to higher scientific impact.

PubMed

Larivière, Vincent; Haustein, Stefanie; Börner, Katy

2015-01-01

Scholarly collaborations across disparate scientific disciplines are challenging. Collaborators are likely to have their offices in another building, attend different conferences, and publish in other venues; they might speak a different scientific language and value an alien scientific culture. This paper presents a detailed analysis of success and failure of interdisciplinary papers--as manifested in the citations they receive. For 9.2 million interdisciplinary research papers published between 2000 and 2012 we show that the majority (69.9%) of co-cited interdisciplinary pairs are "win-win" relationships, i.e., papers that cite them have higher citation impact and there are as few as 3.3% "lose-lose" relationships. Papers citing references from subdisciplines positioned far apart (in the conceptual space of the UCSD map of science) attract the highest relative citation counts. The findings support the assumption that interdisciplinary research is more successful and leads to results greater than the sum of its disciplinary parts.

Citation Analysis of The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine from KoMCI, Web of Science, and Scopus

PubMed Central

2011-01-01

The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine (KJIM) is the international journal published in English by the Korean Association of Internal Medicine. To understand the position of the journal in three different databases, the citation indicators were elucidated. From databases such as Korean Medical Citation Index (KoMCI), Web of Science, and Scopus, citation indicators such as the impact factor, SCImago journal rank (SJR), or Hirsch Index were calculated according to the year and the results were drawn. The KJIM 2010 impact factor increased to 0.623 in Web of Science. That of year 2009 in KoMCI was a 0.149. The 2009 SJR in Scopus was 0.073, with a ranking of 27/72 (37.5%) in the category of internal medicine and 414/1,618 (25.6%) in the category of medicine, miscellaneous. The Hirsch Index from KoMCI, Web of Science and Scopus were 5, 14, and 16, respectively. The KJIM is now cited more by international researchers than Korean researchers, indicating that the content of the journal is now valued at the international level. PMID:21437155

Citation analysis of The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine from KoMCI, Web of Science, and Scopus.

PubMed

Huh, Sun

2011-03-01

The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine (KJIM) is the international journal published in English by the Korean Association of Internal Medicine. To understand the position of the journal in three different databases, the citation indicators were elucidated. From databases such as Korean Medical Citation Index (KoMCI), Web of Science, and Scopus, citation indicators such as the impact factor, SCImago journal rank (SJR), or Hirsch Index were calculated according to the year and the results were drawn. The KJIM 2010 impact factor increased to 0.623 in Web of Science. That of year 2009 in KoMCI was a 0.149. The 2009 SJR in Scopus was 0.073, with a ranking of 27/72 (37.5%) in the category of internal medicine and 414/1,618 (25.6%) in the category of medicine, miscellaneous. The Hirsch Index from KoMCI, Web of Science and Scopus were 5, 14, and 16, respectively. The KJIM is now cited more by international researchers than Korean researchers, indicating that the content of the journal is now valued at the international level.

Predicting long-term citation impact of articles in social and personality psychology.

PubMed

Haslam, Nick; Koval, Peter

2010-06-01

The citation impact of a comprehensive sample of articles published in social and personality psychology journals in 1998 was evaluated. Potential predictors of the 10-yr. citation impact of 1580 articles from 37 journals were investigated, including number of authors, number of references, journal impact factor, author nationality, and article length, using linear regression. The impact factor of the journal in which articles appeared was the primary predictor of the citations that they accrued, accounting for 30% of the total variance. Articles with greater length, more references, and more authors were cited relatively often, although the citation advantage of longer articles was not proportionate to their length. A citation advantage was also enjoyed by authors from the United States of America, Canada, and the United Kingdom. 37% of the variance in the total number of citations was accounted for by the study variables.

Measuring the Value of Research Data: A Citation Analysis of Oceanographic Data Sets

PubMed Central

Belter, Christopher W.

2014-01-01

Evaluation of scientific research is becoming increasingly reliant on publication-based bibliometric indicators, which may result in the devaluation of other scientific activities - such as data curation – that do not necessarily result in the production of scientific publications. This issue may undermine the movement to openly share and cite data sets in scientific publications because researchers are unlikely to devote the effort necessary to curate their research data if they are unlikely to receive credit for doing so. This analysis attempts to demonstrate the bibliometric impact of properly curated and openly accessible data sets by attempting to generate citation counts for three data sets archived at the National Oceanographic Data Center. My findings suggest that all three data sets are highly cited, with estimated citation counts in most cases higher than 99% of all the journal articles published in Oceanography during the same years. I also find that methods of citing and referring to these data sets in scientific publications are highly inconsistent, despite the fact that a formal citation format is suggested for each data set. These findings have important implications for developing a data citation format, encouraging researchers to properly curate their research data, and evaluating the bibliometric impact of individuals and institutions. PMID:24671177

Measuring the value of research data: a citation analysis of oceanographic data sets.

PubMed

Belter, Christopher W

2014-01-01

Evaluation of scientific research is becoming increasingly reliant on publication-based bibliometric indicators, which may result in the devaluation of other scientific activities--such as data curation--that do not necessarily result in the production of scientific publications. This issue may undermine the movement to openly share and cite data sets in scientific publications because researchers are unlikely to devote the effort necessary to curate their research data if they are unlikely to receive credit for doing so. This analysis attempts to demonstrate the bibliometric impact of properly curated and openly accessible data sets by attempting to generate citation counts for three data sets archived at the National Oceanographic Data Center. My findings suggest that all three data sets are highly cited, with estimated citation counts in most cases higher than 99% of all the journal articles published in Oceanography during the same years. I also find that methods of citing and referring to these data sets in scientific publications are highly inconsistent, despite the fact that a formal citation format is suggested for each data set. These findings have important implications for developing a data citation format, encouraging researchers to properly curate their research data, and evaluating the bibliometric impact of individuals and institutions.

Prior Publication Productivity, Grant Percentile Ranking, and Topic-Normalized Citation Impact of NHLBI Cardiovascular R01 Grants

PubMed Central

Kaltman, Jonathan R.; Evans, Frank; Danthi, Narasimhan; Wu, Colin O.; DiMichele, Donna; Lauer, Michael S.

2014-01-01

Rationale We previously demonstrated absence of association between peer-review derived percentile ranking and raw citation impact in a large cohort of NHLBI cardiovascular R01 grants, but we did not consider pre-grant investigator publication productivity. We also did not normalize citation counts for scientific field, type of paper, and year of publication. Objective Determine whether measures of investigator prior productivity predict a grant’s subsequent scientific impact as measured by normalized citation metrics. Methods and Results We identified 1492 investigator-initiated de novo NHLBI R01 grant applications funded between 2001 and 2008 and linked the publications from these grants to their “InCites™” (Thompson Reuters) citation record. InCites™ provides a normalized citation count for each publication stratifying by year of publication, type of publication, and field of science. The co-primary endpoints for this analysis were the normalized citation impact per million dollars allocated and the number of publications per grant that have normalized citation rate in the top decile per million dollars allocated (“top-10% papers”). Prior productivity measures included the number of NHLBI-supported publications each principal investigator published in the 5 years before grant review and the corresponding prior normalized citation impact score. After accounting for potential confounders, there was no association between peer-review percentile ranking and bibliometric endpoints (all adjusted P > 0.5). However, prior productivity was predictive (P<0.0001). Conclusion Even after normalizing citation counts, we confirmed a lack of association between peer-review grant percentile ranking and grant citation impact. However, prior investigator publication productivity was predictive of grant-specific citation impact. PMID:25214575

Prior publication productivity, grant percentile ranking, and topic-normalized citation impact of NHLBI cardiovascular R01 grants.

PubMed

Kaltman, Jonathan R; Evans, Frank J; Danthi, Narasimhan S; Wu, Colin O; DiMichele, Donna M; Lauer, Michael S

2014-09-12

We previously demonstrated absence of association between peer-review-derived percentile ranking and raw citation impact in a large cohort of National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute cardiovascular R01 grants, but we did not consider pregrant investigator publication productivity. We also did not normalize citation counts for scientific field, type of article, and year of publication. To determine whether measures of investigator prior productivity predict a grant's subsequent scientific impact as measured by normalized citation metrics. We identified 1492 investigator-initiated de novo National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute R01 grant applications funded between 2001 and 2008 and linked the publications from these grants to their InCites (Thompson Reuters) citation record. InCites provides a normalized citation count for each publication stratifying by year of publication, type of publication, and field of science. The coprimary end points for this analysis were the normalized citation impact per million dollars allocated and the number of publications per grant that has normalized citation rate in the top decile per million dollars allocated (top 10% articles). Prior productivity measures included the number of National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-supported publications each principal investigator published in the 5 years before grant review and the corresponding prior normalized citation impact score. After accounting for potential confounders, there was no association between peer-review percentile ranking and bibliometric end points (all adjusted P>0.5). However, prior productivity was predictive (P<0.0001). Even after normalizing citation counts, we confirmed a lack of association between peer-review grant percentile ranking and grant citation impact. However, prior investigator publication productivity was predictive of grant-specific citation impact. © 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.

I Like, I Cite? Do Facebook Likes Predict the Impact of Scientific Work?

PubMed

Ringelhan, Stefanie; Wollersheim, Jutta; Welpe, Isabell M

2015-01-01

Due to the increasing amount of scientific work and the typical delays in publication, promptly assessing the impact of scholarly work is a huge challenge. To meet this challenge, one solution may be to create and discover innovative indicators. The goal of this paper is to investigate whether Facebook likes for unpublished manuscripts that are uploaded to the Internet could be used as an early indicator of the future impact of the scientific work. To address our research question, we compared Facebook likes for manuscripts uploaded to the Harvard Business School website (Study 1) and the bioRxiv website (Study 2) with traditional impact indicators (journal article citations, Impact Factor, Immediacy Index) for those manuscripts that have been published as a journal article. Although based on our full sample of Study 1 (N = 170), Facebook likes do not predict traditional impact indicators, for manuscripts with one or more Facebook likes (n = 95), our results indicate that the more Facebook likes a manuscript receives, the more journal article citations the manuscript receives. In additional analyses (for which we categorized the manuscripts as psychological and non-psychological manuscripts), we found that the significant prediction of citations stems from the psychological and not the non-psychological manuscripts. In Study 2, we observed that Facebook likes (N = 270) and non-zero Facebook likes (n = 84) do not predict traditional impact indicators. Taken together, our findings indicate an interdisciplinary difference in the predictive value of Facebook likes, according to which Facebook likes only predict citations in the psychological area but not in the non-psychological area of business or in the field of life sciences. Our paper contributes to understanding the possibilities and limits of the use of social media indicators as potential early indicators of the impact of scientific work.

I Like, I Cite? Do Facebook Likes Predict the Impact of Scientific Work?

PubMed Central

Ringelhan, Stefanie; Wollersheim, Jutta; Welpe, Isabell M.

2015-01-01

Due to the increasing amount of scientific work and the typical delays in publication, promptly assessing the impact of scholarly work is a huge challenge. To meet this challenge, one solution may be to create and discover innovative indicators. The goal of this paper is to investigate whether Facebook likes for unpublished manuscripts that are uploaded to the Internet could be used as an early indicator of the future impact of the scientific work. To address our research question, we compared Facebook likes for manuscripts uploaded to the Harvard Business School website (Study 1) and the bioRxiv website (Study 2) with traditional impact indicators (journal article citations, Impact Factor, Immediacy Index) for those manuscripts that have been published as a journal article. Although based on our full sample of Study 1 (N = 170), Facebook likes do not predict traditional impact indicators, for manuscripts with one or more Facebook likes (n = 95), our results indicate that the more Facebook likes a manuscript receives, the more journal article citations the manuscript receives. In additional analyses (for which we categorized the manuscripts as psychological and non-psychological manuscripts), we found that the significant prediction of citations stems from the psychological and not the non-psychological manuscripts. In Study 2, we observed that Facebook likes (N = 270) and non-zero Facebook likes (n = 84) do not predict traditional impact indicators. Taken together, our findings indicate an interdisciplinary difference in the predictive value of Facebook likes, according to which Facebook likes only predict citations in the psychological area but not in the non-psychological area of business or in the field of life sciences. Our paper contributes to understanding the possibilities and limits of the use of social media indicators as potential early indicators of the impact of scientific work. PMID:26244779

The academic impact of the Triological Society theses--Mosher and Fowler awards: citations, impact factor, and h-index.

PubMed

Badran, Karam W; Lahham, Sari; Mahboubi, Hossein; Crumley, Roger L; Wong, Brian J F

2013-11-01

The Triological Society requires thesis submission for full membership. Accepted theses (AT) may be recognized with designations of: Mosher Awards (MA), Fowler Awards (FA), Honorable Mention for Basic Science (HMBS), and Honorable Mention for Clinical Science (HMCS). We sought to determine and compare the scholarly impact of Triological Society theses, their authors, and whether differences exist between AT and those that receive special recognition. Retrospective analysis of awards and theses compiled by The Triological Society home office from 1998 to 2011. Thomson Reuters' Integrated Search Interface (ISI) Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar and were used to determine citations and the author's h-index. Trend and statistical analysis was performed. Of the 307 Triological Society theses examined, 275 were published and had record of citation. H-indices and number of citations were found to be nonparametric; thus, median and quartile (1(st) -3(rd) quartiles) values were found to be the following: AT 11 (4-26), MA 18 (9-25), FA 6 (1-28), HMBS 11 (4-26), and HMCS 16 (1-28) for number of citations per published thesis. H-indices of authors with accepted theses were AT 15 (10-19), MA 16 (15-23), FA 18 (10-23), HMBS 16 (11-19), and HMCS 15 (11-21). When comparing all groupings of theses and award winners with bibliometric indices, no statistical significance was found (P >0.5). The Triological Society cultivates a competitive pool of applicants as membership is highly regarded. Negligible difference in citations and author h-index were observed between AT, MA, and FA theses indicated that the level of excellence is uniform, and thesis submission remains influential and prestigious. Copyright © 2013 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.

Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level.

PubMed

Hutchins, B Ian; Yuan, Xin; Anderson, James M; Santangelo, George M

2016-09-01

Despite their recognized limitations, bibliometric assessments of scientific productivity have been widely adopted. We describe here an improved method to quantify the influence of a research article by making novel use of its co-citation network to field-normalize the number of citations it has received. Article citation rates are divided by an expected citation rate that is derived from performance of articles in the same field and benchmarked to a peer comparison group. The resulting Relative Citation Ratio is article level and field independent and provides an alternative to the invalid practice of using journal impact factors to identify influential papers. To illustrate one application of our method, we analyzed 88,835 articles published between 2003 and 2010 and found that the National Institutes of Health awardees who authored those papers occupy relatively stable positions of influence across all disciplines. We demonstrate that the values generated by this method strongly correlate with the opinions of subject matter experts in biomedical research and suggest that the same approach should be generally applicable to articles published in all areas of science. A beta version of iCite, our web tool for calculating Relative Citation Ratios of articles listed in PubMed, is available at https://icite.od.nih.gov.

Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level

PubMed Central

Hutchins, B. Ian; Yuan, Xin; Santangelo, George M.

2016-01-01

Despite their recognized limitations, bibliometric assessments of scientific productivity have been widely adopted. We describe here an improved method to quantify the influence of a research article by making novel use of its co-citation network to field-normalize the number of citations it has received. Article citation rates are divided by an expected citation rate that is derived from performance of articles in the same field and benchmarked to a peer comparison group. The resulting Relative Citation Ratio is article level and field independent and provides an alternative to the invalid practice of using journal impact factors to identify influential papers. To illustrate one application of our method, we analyzed 88,835 articles published between 2003 and 2010 and found that the National Institutes of Health awardees who authored those papers occupy relatively stable positions of influence across all disciplines. We demonstrate that the values generated by this method strongly correlate with the opinions of subject matter experts in biomedical research and suggest that the same approach should be generally applicable to articles published in all areas of science. A beta version of iCite, our web tool for calculating Relative Citation Ratios of articles listed in PubMed, is available at https://icite.od.nih.gov. PMID:27599104

From Excessive Journal Self-Cites to Citation Stacking: Analysis of Journal Self-Citation Kinetics in Search for Journals, Which Boost Their Scientometric Indicators.

PubMed

Heneberg, Petr

2016-01-01

Bibliometric indicators increasingly affect careers, funding, and reputation of individuals, their institutions and journals themselves. In contrast to author self-citations, little is known about kinetics of journal self-citations. Here we hypothesized that they may show a generalizable pattern within particular research fields or across multiple fields. We thus analyzed self-cites to 60 journals from three research fields (multidisciplinary sciences, parasitology, and information science). We also hypothesized that the kinetics of journal self-citations and citations received from other journals of the same publisher may differ from foreign citations. We analyzed the journals published the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Nature Publishing Group, and Editura Academiei Române. We found that although the kinetics of journal self-cites is generally faster compared to foreign cites, it shows some field-specific characteristics. Particularly in information science journals, the initial increase in a share of journal self-citations during post-publication year 0 was completely absent. Self-promoting journal self-citations of top-tier journals have rather indirect but negligible direct effects on bibliometric indicators, affecting just the immediacy index and marginally increasing the impact factor itself as long as the affected journals are well established in their fields. In contrast, other forms of journal self-citations and citation stacking may severely affect the impact factor, or other citation-based indices. We identified here a network consisting of three Romanian physics journals Proceedings of the Romanian Academy, Series A, Romanian Journal of Physics, and Romanian Reports in Physics, which displayed low to moderate ratio of journal self-citations, but which multiplied recently their impact factors, and were mutually responsible for 55.9%, 64.7% and 63.3% of citations within the impact factor calculation window to the three journals, respectively. They did not receive nearly any network self-cites prior impact factor calculation window, and their network self-cites decreased sharply after the impact factor calculation window. Journal self-citations and citation stacking requires increased attention and elimination from citation indices.

From Excessive Journal Self-Cites to Citation Stacking: Analysis of Journal Self-Citation Kinetics in Search for Journals, Which Boost Their Scientometric Indicators

PubMed Central

2016-01-01

Bibliometric indicators increasingly affect careers, funding, and reputation of individuals, their institutions and journals themselves. In contrast to author self-citations, little is known about kinetics of journal self-citations. Here we hypothesized that they may show a generalizable pattern within particular research fields or across multiple fields. We thus analyzed self-cites to 60 journals from three research fields (multidisciplinary sciences, parasitology, and information science). We also hypothesized that the kinetics of journal self-citations and citations received from other journals of the same publisher may differ from foreign citations. We analyzed the journals published the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Nature Publishing Group, and Editura Academiei Române. We found that although the kinetics of journal self-cites is generally faster compared to foreign cites, it shows some field-specific characteristics. Particularly in information science journals, the initial increase in a share of journal self-citations during post-publication year 0 was completely absent. Self-promoting journal self-citations of top-tier journals have rather indirect but negligible direct effects on bibliometric indicators, affecting just the immediacy index and marginally increasing the impact factor itself as long as the affected journals are well established in their fields. In contrast, other forms of journal self-citations and citation stacking may severely affect the impact factor, or other citation-based indices. We identified here a network consisting of three Romanian physics journals Proceedings of the Romanian Academy, Series A, Romanian Journal of Physics, and Romanian Reports in Physics, which displayed low to moderate ratio of journal self-citations, but which multiplied recently their impact factors, and were mutually responsible for 55.9%, 64.7% and 63.3% of citations within the impact factor calculation window to the three journals, respectively. They did not receive nearly any network self-cites prior impact factor calculation window, and their network self-cites decreased sharply after the impact factor calculation window. Journal self-citations and citation stacking requires increased attention and elimination from citation indices. PMID:27088862

Network effects on scientific collaborations.

PubMed

Uddin, Shahadat; Hossain, Liaquat; Rasmussen, Kim

2013-01-01

The analysis of co-authorship network aims at exploring the impact of network structure on the outcome of scientific collaborations and research publications. However, little is known about what network properties are associated with authors who have increased number of joint publications and are being cited highly. Measures of social network analysis, for example network centrality and tie strength, have been utilized extensively in current co-authorship literature to explore different behavioural patterns of co-authorship networks. Using three SNA measures (i.e., degree centrality, closeness centrality and betweenness centrality), we explore scientific collaboration networks to understand factors influencing performance (i.e., citation count) and formation (tie strength between authors) of such networks. A citation count is the number of times an article is cited by other articles. We use co-authorship dataset of the research field of 'steel structure' for the year 2005 to 2009. To measure the strength of scientific collaboration between two authors, we consider the number of articles co-authored by them. In this study, we examine how citation count of a scientific publication is influenced by different centrality measures of its co-author(s) in a co-authorship network. We further analyze the impact of the network positions of authors on the strength of their scientific collaborations. We use both correlation and regression methods for data analysis leading to statistical validation. We identify that citation count of a research article is positively correlated with the degree centrality and betweenness centrality values of its co-author(s). Also, we reveal that degree centrality and betweenness centrality values of authors in a co-authorship network are positively correlated with the strength of their scientific collaborations. Authors' network positions in co-authorship networks influence the performance (i.e., citation count) and formation (i.e., tie strength) of scientific collaborations.

Effectiveness of Journal Ranking Schemes as a Tool for Locating Information

PubMed Central

Stringer, Michael J.; Sales-Pardo, Marta; Nunes Amaral, Luís A.

2008-01-01

Background The rise of electronic publishing [1], preprint archives, blogs, and wikis is raising concerns among publishers, editors, and scientists about the present day relevance of academic journals and traditional peer review [2]. These concerns are especially fuelled by the ability of search engines to automatically identify and sort information [1]. It appears that academic journals can only remain relevant if acceptance of research for publication within a journal allows readers to infer immediate, reliable information on the value of that research. Methodology/Principal Findings Here, we systematically evaluate the effectiveness of journals, through the work of editors and reviewers, at evaluating unpublished research. We find that the distribution of the number of citations to a paper published in a given journal in a specific year converges to a steady state after a journal-specific transient time, and demonstrate that in the steady state the logarithm of the number of citations has a journal-specific typical value. We then develop a model for the asymptotic number of citations accrued by papers published in a journal that closely matches the data. Conclusions/Significance Our model enables us to quantify both the typical impact and the range of impacts of papers published in a journal. Finally, we propose a journal-ranking scheme that maximizes the efficiency of locating high impact research. PMID:18301760

Impact factor: Universalism and reliability of assessment.

PubMed

Grzybowski, Andrzej; Patryn, Rafał

In 1955, Eugene Garfield (1925-1917) published a paper in Science where for the first time he advocated the necessity of introducing parameters to assess the quality of scientific journals. Underlying this necessity was an observation of a trend where the whole area of influence in academic publishing was dominated by a narrow group of large interdisciplinary research journals. For this reason, along with Irving H. Sher, they created the impact factor (IF), also called the Garfield impact factor, journal citation rate, journal influence, and journal impact factor. The concept of IF concerns a research discipline called bibliometrics, which uses mathematical and statistical methods to analyze scientific publications. Established by Garfield in 1963, the Science Citation Index, a record of scientific publications and citations therein, contributed directly to the increased importance of this method. Since the 1960s, the register of scientific publications has expanded and their evaluation by the IF has become a fundamental and universal measure of the journal's value. Contrary to the authors' intentions in the creation of the index (IF), it is often used to assess the quality of contributions, simultaneously assessing the authors' achievements or academic career and academic institutions' funding possibilities. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Implications of Web of Science journal impact factor for scientific output evaluation in 16 institutions and investigators' opinion.

PubMed

Wáng, Yì-Xiáng J; Arora, Richa; Choi, Yongdoo; Chung, Hsiao-Wen; Egorov, Vyacheslav I; Frahm, Jens; Kudo, Hiroyuki; Kuyumcu, Suleyman; Laurent, Sophie; Loffroy, Romaric; Maurea, Simone; Morcos, Sameh K; Ni, Yicheng; Oei, Edwin H G; Sabarudin, Akmal; Yu, Xin

2014-12-01

Journal based metrics is known not to be ideal for the measurement of the quality of individual researcher's scientific output. In the current report 16 contributors from Hong Kong SAR, India, Korea, Taiwan, Russia, Germany, Japan, Turkey, Belgium, France, Italy, UK, The Netherlands, Malaysia, and USA are invited. The following six questions were asked: (I) is Web of Sciences journal impact factor (IF) and Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) citation the main academic output performance evaluation tool in your institution? and your country? (II) How does Google citation count in your institution? and your country? (III) If paper is published in a non-SCI journal but it is included in PubMed and searchable by Google scholar, how it is valued when compared with a paper published in a journal with an IF? (IV) Do you value to publish a piece of your work in a non-SCI journal as much as a paper published in a journal with an IF? (V) What is your personal view on the metric measurement of scientific output? (VI) Overall, do you think Web of Sciences journal IF is beneficial, or actually it is doing more harm? The results show that IF and ISI citation is heavily affecting the academic life in most of the institutions. Google citation and evaluation, while is being used and convenient and speedy, has not gain wide 'official' recognition as a tool for scientific output evaluation.

Mandatory and Self-citation; Types, Reasons, Their Benefits and Disadvantages.

PubMed

Hemmat Esfe, Mohammad; Wongwises, Somchai; Asadi, Amin; Karimipour, Arash; Akbari, Mohammad

2015-12-01

This paper defines and discusses two important types of citations, self-citation and mandatory citation, in engineering journals. Citation can be classified in three categories: optional; semi-mandatory; and mandatory. There are some negative and positive impacts for the authors' paper and journals' reputation if mandatory citation of a paper or set of papers is requested. These effects can be different based on the recommended papers for citing in the new research. Mandatory citation has various types discussed in this paper. Self-citation and its reasons and impacts are also discussed in the present study.

Publication Metrics of Dental Journals - What is the Role of Self Citations in Determining the Impact Factor of Journals?

PubMed

Elangovan, Satheesh; Allareddy, Veerasathpurush

2015-09-01

The objectives of the present study are to examine the publication metrics of dental journals and to delineate the role of self citations in determining the impact factor of journals. The Journal Citation Reports database was used. All dental journals that had an impact factor assigned for year 2013 were selected. The outcomes were Impact Factor (IF), Eigenfactor™ (EF), article influence score (AIS), and proportion of self-citations to total citations. Independent variables were geographic region of journal and ranking of journal (based on IF). Non-parametric tests were used to examine the associations between outcomes and independent variables. During the year 2013, 82 journals in dentistry had an IF. Mean IF was 1.489 and mean IF without including self-citations was 1.231. Mean EF scores and AIS were .00458 and .5141 respectively. Mean percentage of self cites to total citations for all dental journals was 12.24%. Higher ranking journals were associated with significantly higher EF and AIS. Journals published in USA/Canada or Europe were associated with higher IF and EF compared to those published in other regions. There were no differences in percentages of self citations to total citations either across journal rankings or geographic region. Top ranking journals tend to have higher IFs due to higher EF and AIS rather than by self-citations. Self-citations increase the impact factors of dental journals by 21%. There was no geographic influence in the percentage of self-citations to total citations thus indicating a healthy dental scientific publishing environment. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Percentile-Based Journal Impact Factors: A Neglected Collection Development Metric

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wagner, A. Ben

2009-01-01

Various normalization techniques to transform journal impact factors (JIFs) into a standard scale or range of values have been reported a number of times in the literature, but have seldom been part of collection development librarians' tool kits. In this paper, JIFs as reported in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) database are converted to…

Rankings and Trends in Citation Patterns of Communication Journals

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Levine, Timothy R.

2010-01-01

Journal citations are increasingly used as indicators of the impact of scholarly work. Because many communication journals are not included in the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI), SSCI impact factors are potentially misleading for communication journals. The current paper reports a citation analysis of 30 communication journals based on…

Impact of self-citation on the H index in the field of academic radiology.

PubMed

Rad, Arash Ehteshami; Shahgholi, Leili; Kallmes, David

2012-04-01

The Hirsch Index (H index) is widely applied as a metric of scientific productivity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of self-citation on the H index in academic radiology. Through the National Resident Matching Program's Web site, one third (47/139) of radiology residency programs were selected randomly. All chairpersons and full professors were included. Using the Scopus database, we calculated the H index as well as the number of cumulative citations with and without inclusion of self-citations. We determined the proportion of academic staff in which H index increased by one, two, or greater than two integers. We also correlated the proportional increase in H index before and after inclusion of self citations with the number of publications. A total of 487 academic staff (47 chair and 440 professors) was identified. Because of self-citation, mean ± SD of the H index increased from 13.7 ± 9.9 to 14.0 ± 10.2; mean ± SD of cumulative citations increased from 1804 ± 1889 to 1870 ± 1971. H index numbers did not change in 376/487 (77%) authors as a result of self-citation. There was no correlation between number of publications and proportional change of H index. The effect of self-citation is minimal in academic radiology, as evidenced by the fact that cumulative citations increase by only 2% and the large majority of H index values do not change by even a single integer after inclusion of self-citation. Copyright © 2012 AUR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The relationship between journal use in a medical library and citation use.

PubMed Central

Tsay, M Y

1998-01-01

The purpose of the study was to investigate the relationship between library journal use and journal citation use in the medical sciences. The six-month journal use study was conducted in the Library of the Veterans General Hospital in Taipei. The data on citation frequency and impact factors were obtained from Journal Citation Reports, 1993 microfiche edition. The study explored the use, citation, and impact factor data, especially for heavily used, highly cited, or high-impact-factor journals. The correlations between frequency of use and citation frequency and between frequency of use and impact factor were determined by using the Spearman rank and Pearson correlation tests. The same comparisons were also made within four subject categories: clinical medicine journals, life science journals, hybrid journals publishing both clinical medicine and life science papers, and journals that publish neither clinical medicine nor life science articles. The results of the study showed that there is a significant correlation between frequency of use and citation frequency, and between frequency of use and impact factor for all titles. There is also a significant correlation between frequency of use and citation frequency and between frequency of use and impact factor for journals that publish either clinical medicine or life science articles, or both. However, the correlation is not significant for other journals. PMID:9549010

The more publication, the higher impact factor: citation analysis of top nine gastroenterology and hepatology journals.

PubMed

Karimi Elizee, Pegah; Karimzadeh Ghassab, Romina; Raoofi, Azam; Miri, Seyyed Mohammad

2012-12-01

The impact factor (IF), as the most important criterion for journal's quality measurement, is affected by the self-citation and number of publications in each journal. To find out the relationship between the number of publications and self-citations in a journal, and their correlations with IF. Self-citations and impact factors of nine top gastroenterology and hepatology journals were assessed during the seven recent years (2005-2011) through Journal Citation Reports (JCR, ISI Thomson Reuters). Although impact factors of all journals increased during the study, five out of nine journals increased the number of publications from 2005 to 2011. There was an increase in self-citation only in the journal of HEPATOLOGY (499 in 2005 vs. 707 in 2011). Impact factors of journals (6.5 ± 3.5) were positively correlated with total number of publications (248.6 ± 91.7) (R: 0.688, P < 0.001). Besides, the self-citation rate (238.73 ± 195.317) was highly correlated with total number of publications in each journal (248.6 ± 91.7) (R: 0.861, P < 0.001). On the other hand, impact factor without self-citation (6.08 ± 3.3) had a correlation (R: 0.672, P < 0.001) with the number of published items (248.6 ± 91.7). The number of articles and self-citation have definite effects on IF of a journal and because IF is the most prominent criterion for journal's quality measurement, it would be a good idea to consider factors affecting on IF such as self-citation.

If I tweet will you cite? The effect of social media exposure of articles on downloads and citations.

PubMed

Tonia, Thomy; Van Oyen, Herman; Berger, Anke; Schindler, Christian; Künzli, Nino

2016-05-01

We sought to investigate whether exposing scientific papers to social media (SM) has an effect on article downloads and citations. We randomized all International Journal of Public Health (IJPH) original articles published between December 2012 and December 2014 to SM exposure (blog post, Twitter and Facebook) or no exposure at three different time points after first online publication. 130 papers (SM exposure = 65, control = 65) were randomized. The number of downloads did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.60) nor did the number of citations (p = 0.88). Adjusting for length of observation and paper's geographical origin did not change these results. There was no difference in the number of downloads and citations between the SM exposure and control group when we stratified for open access status. The number of downloads and number of citations were significantly correlated in both groups. SM exposure did not have a significant effect on traditional impact metrics, such as downloads and citations. However, other metrics may measure the added value that social media might offer to a scientific journal, such as wider dissemination.

Impact Factors Show Increased Use of AGU Journals in 2008

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ford, Barbara Meyers

2009-07-01

The latest numbers released from Journal Citation Reports (JCR), published annually by Thomson Reuters, show large increases in the impact factor (IF) for several AGU journals. IFs are one way for publishers to know that readers have found their journals useful and of value in research. A journal's IF is calculated by taking the total number of citations to articles published by a given journal in the past 2 years and dividing it by the total number of papers published by the journal in the same time period. More generally, it can be seen as the frequency with which articles in a journal have been cited over the past year. The numbers speak for themselves (see Table 1).

Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services.

PubMed

Thelwall, Mike; Haustein, Stefanie; Larivière, Vincent; Sugimoto, Cassidy R

2013-01-01

Altmetric measurements derived from the social web are increasingly advocated and used as early indicators of article impact and usefulness. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic scientific evidence that altmetrics are valid proxies of either impact or utility although a few case studies have reported medium correlations between specific altmetrics and citation rates for individual journals or fields. To fill this gap, this study compares 11 altmetrics with Web of Science citations for 76 to 208,739 PubMed articles with at least one altmetric mention in each case and up to 1,891 journals per metric. It also introduces a simple sign test to overcome biases caused by different citation and usage windows. Statistically significant associations were found between higher metric scores and higher citations for articles with positive altmetric scores in all cases with sufficient evidence (Twitter, Facebook wall posts, research highlights, blogs, mainstream media and forums) except perhaps for Google+ posts. Evidence was insufficient for LinkedIn, Pinterest, question and answer sites, and Reddit, and no conclusions should be drawn about articles with zero altmetric scores or the strength of any correlation between altmetrics and citations. Nevertheless, comparisons between citations and metric values for articles published at different times, even within the same year, can remove or reverse this association and so publishers and scientometricians should consider the effect of time when using altmetrics to rank articles. Finally, the coverage of all the altmetrics except for Twitter seems to be low and so it is not clear if they are prevalent enough to be useful in practice.

Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services

PubMed Central

Thelwall, Mike; Haustein, Stefanie; Larivière, Vincent; Sugimoto, Cassidy R.

2013-01-01

Altmetric measurements derived from the social web are increasingly advocated and used as early indicators of article impact and usefulness. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic scientific evidence that altmetrics are valid proxies of either impact or utility although a few case studies have reported medium correlations between specific altmetrics and citation rates for individual journals or fields. To fill this gap, this study compares 11 altmetrics with Web of Science citations for 76 to 208,739 PubMed articles with at least one altmetric mention in each case and up to 1,891 journals per metric. It also introduces a simple sign test to overcome biases caused by different citation and usage windows. Statistically significant associations were found between higher metric scores and higher citations for articles with positive altmetric scores in all cases with sufficient evidence (Twitter, Facebook wall posts, research highlights, blogs, mainstream media and forums) except perhaps for Google+ posts. Evidence was insufficient for LinkedIn, Pinterest, question and answer sites, and Reddit, and no conclusions should be drawn about articles with zero altmetric scores or the strength of any correlation between altmetrics and citations. Nevertheless, comparisons between citations and metric values for articles published at different times, even within the same year, can remove or reverse this association and so publishers and scientometricians should consider the effect of time when using altmetrics to rank articles. Finally, the coverage of all the altmetrics except for Twitter seems to be low and so it is not clear if they are prevalent enough to be useful in practice. PMID:23724101

Mapping cross-border collaboration and communication in cardiovascular research from 1992 to 2012

PubMed Central

Gal, Diane; Glänzel, Wolfgang; Sipido, Karin R.

2017-01-01

Aims The growing burden of cardiovascular disease requires growth in research and innovation. We examine world-wide participation and citation impact across the cardiovascular research landscape from 1992 to 2012; we investigate cross-fertilization between countries and examine whether cross-border collaboration affects impact. Methods and Results State-of-the-art bibliometric methods and indicators are used to identify cardiovascular publications from the Web of Science, and to map trends over time in output, citation impact, and collaboration. The publication output in cardiovascular research has grown steadily from 1992 to 2012 with increased participation worldwide. China has the highest growth as relative share. The USA share initially predominated yet has reduced steadily. Over time, the EU-27 supra-national region has increased its participation above the USA, though on average it has not had greater citation impact than the USA. However, a number of European countries, as well as Australia and Canada, have improved their absolute and relative citation impact above that of the USA by 2006–2012. Europe is a hub of cross-fertilization with strengthening collaborations and strong citation links; the UK, Germany, and France remain central in this network. The USA has the highest number of strong citation links with other countries. All countries, but especially smaller, highly collaborative countries, have higher citation impact for their internationally collaborative research when compared with their domestic publications. Conclusion Participation in cardiovascular research is growing but growth and impact show wide variability between countries. Cross-border collaboration is increasing, in particular within the EU, and is associated with greater citation impact. PMID:27997881

References that anyone can edit: review of Wikipedia citations in peer reviewed health science literature.

PubMed

Bould, M Dylan; Hladkowicz, Emily S; Pigford, Ashlee-Ann E; Ufholz, Lee-Anne; Postonogova, Tatyana; Shin, Eunkyung; Boet, Sylvain

2014-03-06

To examine indexed health science journals to evaluate the prevalence of Wikipedia citations, identify the journals that publish articles with Wikipedia citations, and determine how Wikipedia is being cited. Bibliometric analysis. Publications in the English language that included citations to Wikipedia were retrieved using the online databases Scopus and Web of Science. To identify health science journals, results were refined using Ulrich's database, selecting for citations from journals indexed in Medline, PubMed, or Embase. Using Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports, 2011 impact factors were collected for all journals included in the search. Resulting citations were thematically coded, and descriptive statistics were calculated. 1433 full text articles from 1008 journals indexed in Medline, PubMed, or Embase with 2049 Wikipedia citations were accessed. The frequency of Wikipedia citations has increased over time; most citations occurred after December 2010. More than half of the citations were coded as definitions (n = 648; 31.6%) or descriptions (n=482; 23.5%). Citations were not limited to journals with a low or no impact factor; the search found Wikipedia citations in many journals with high impact factors. Many publications are citing information from a tertiary source that can be edited by anyone, although permanent, evidence based sources are available. We encourage journal editors and reviewers to use caution when publishing articles that cite Wikipedia.

A generalized view of self-citation: direct, co-author, collaborative, and coercive induced self-citation.

PubMed

Ioannidis, John P A

2015-01-01

The phenomenon of self-citation can present in many different forms, including direct, co-author, collaborative, and coercive induced self-citation. It can also pertain to the citation of single scientists, groups of scientists, journals, and institutions. This article presents some case studies of extreme self-citation practices. It also discusses the implications of different types of self-citation. Self-citation is not necessarily inappropriate by default. In fact, usually it is fully appropriate but often it is even necessary. Conversely, inappropriate self-citation practices may be highly misleading and may distort the scientific literature. Coercive induced self-citation is the most difficult to discover. Coercive Induced self-citation may happen directly from reviewers of articles, but also indirectly from reviewers of grants, scientific advisors who steer a research agenda, and leaders of funding agencies who may espouse spending disproportionately large funds in research domains that perpetuate their own self-legacy. Inappropriate self-citation can be only a surrogate marker of what might be much greater distortions of the scientific corpus towards conformity to specific opinions and biases. Inappropriate self-citations eventually affect also impact metrics. Different impact metrics vary in the extent to which they can be gamed through self-citation practices. Citation indices that are more gaming-proof are available and should be more widely used. We need more empirical studies to dissect the impact of different types of inappropriate self-citation and to examine the effectiveness of interventions to limit them. Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.

High-Citation Papers in Space Physics: Examination of Gender, Country, and Paper Characteristics

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Moldwin, Mark B.; Liemohn, Michael W.

2018-04-01

The number of citations to a refereed journal article from other refereed journal articles is a measure of its impact. Papers, individuals, journals, departments, and institutions are increasingly judged by the impact they have in their disciplines, and citation counts are now a relatively easy (though not necessarily accurate or straightforward) way of attempting to quantify impact. This study examines papers published in the Journal of Geophysical Research—Space Physics in the year 2012 (n = 705) and analyzes the characteristics of high-citation papers compared to low-citation papers. We find that high-citation papers generally have a large number of authors (>5) and cite significantly more articles in the reference section than low-citation papers. We also examined the gender and country of institution of the first author and found that there is not a statistically significant gender bias, but there are some significant differences in citation statistics between articles based on the country of first-author institution.

Tracing the indirect societal impacts of biomedical research: development and piloting of a technique based on citations.

PubMed

Jones, Teresa H; Hanney, Steve

There is growing interest in assessing the societal impacts of research such as informing health policies and clinical practice, and contributing to improved health. Bibliometric approaches have long been used to assess knowledge outputs, but can they also help evaluate societal impacts? We aimed to see how far the societal impacts could be traced by identifying key research articles in the psychiatry/neuroscience area and exploring their societal impact through analysing several generations of citing papers. Informed by a literature review of citation categorisation, we developed a prototype template to qualitatively assess a reference's importance to the citing paper and tested it on 96 papers. We refined the template for a pilot study to assess the importance of citations, including self-cites, to four key research articles. We then similarly assessed citations to those citing papers for which the key article was Central i.e. it was very important to the message of the citing article. We applied a filter of three or more citation occasions in order to focus on the citing articles where the reference was most likely to be Central. We found the reference was Central for 4.4 % of citing research articles overall and ten times more frequently if the article contained three or more citation occasions. We created a citation stream of influence for each key paper across up to five generations of citations. We searched the Web of Science for citations to all Central papers and identified societal impacts, including international clinical guidelines citing papers across the generations.

The citation impact of hydrology journals

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Clark, Martyn P.; Hanson, R. Brooks

2017-06-01

We examine a suite of journal-level productivity and citation statistics for six leading hydrology journals in order to help authors understand the robustness and meaning of journal impact factors. The main results are (1) the probability distribution of citations is remarkably homogenous across hydrology journals; (2) hydrology papers tend to have a long-lasting impact, with a large fraction of papers cited after the 2 year window used to calculate the journal impact factor; and (3) journal impact factors are characterized by substantial year-to-year variability (especially for smaller journals), primarily because a small number of highly cited papers have a large influence on the journal impact factor. Consequently, the ranking of hydrology journals with respect to the journal impact factor in a given year does not have much information content. These results highlight problems in using citation data to evaluate hydrologic science. We hope that this analysis helps authors better understand journal-level citation statistics, and also helps improve research assessments in institutions and funding agencies.

The Journal Impact Factor: Moving Toward an Alternative and Combined Scientometric Approach

PubMed Central

Nurmashev, Bekaidar

2017-01-01

The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is a single citation metric, which is widely employed for ranking journals and choosing target journals, but is also misused as the proxy of the quality of individual articles and academic achievements of authors. This article analyzes Scopus-based publication activity on the JIF and overviews some of the numerous misuses of the JIF, global initiatives to overcome the ‘obsession’ with impact factors, and emerging strategies to revise the concept of the scholarly impact. The growing number of articles on the JIF, most of which are in English, reflects interest of experts in journal editing and scientometrics toward its uses, misuses, and options to overcome related problems. Solely displaying values of the JIFs on the journal websites is criticized by experts as these average metrics do not reflect skewness of citation distribution of individual articles. Emerging strategies suggest to complement the JIFs with citation plots and alternative metrics, reflecting uses of individual articles in terms of downloads and distribution of related information through social media and networking platforms. It is also proposed to revise the original formula of the JIF calculation and embrace the concept of the impact and importance of individual articles. The latter is largely dependent on ethical soundness of the journal instructions, proper editing and structuring of articles, efforts to promote related information through social media, and endorsements of professional societies. PMID:28049225

The Journal Impact Factor: Moving Toward an Alternative and Combined Scientometric Approach.

PubMed

Gasparyan, Armen Yuri; Nurmashev, Bekaidar; Yessirkepov, Marlen; Udovik, Elena E; Baryshnikov, Aleksandr A; Kitas, George D

2017-02-01

The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is a single citation metric, which is widely employed for ranking journals and choosing target journals, but is also misused as the proxy of the quality of individual articles and academic achievements of authors. This article analyzes Scopus-based publication activity on the JIF and overviews some of the numerous misuses of the JIF, global initiatives to overcome the 'obsession' with impact factors, and emerging strategies to revise the concept of the scholarly impact. The growing number of articles on the JIF, most of which are in English, reflects interest of experts in journal editing and scientometrics toward its uses, misuses, and options to overcome related problems. Solely displaying values of the JIFs on the journal websites is criticized by experts as these average metrics do not reflect skewness of citation distribution of individual articles. Emerging strategies suggest to complement the JIFs with citation plots and alternative metrics, reflecting uses of individual articles in terms of downloads and distribution of related information through social media and networking platforms. It is also proposed to revise the original formula of the JIF calculation and embrace the concept of the impact and importance of individual articles. The latter is largely dependent on ethical soundness of the journal instructions, proper editing and structuring of articles, efforts to promote related information through social media, and endorsements of professional societies.

A descriptive study of U.S. OSHA penalties and inspection frequency for musculoskeletal disorders in the workplace.

PubMed

Courtney, T K; Clancy, E A

1998-08-01

Information on the frequency and cost of OSHA enforcement penalties for musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in the literature is limited. Such information would be of value to organizations in estimating the likelihood and financial impact of enforcement activity in their operations. This descriptive study utilized data from federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspections to examine the distribution of penalty costs arising from inspections with MSD-related citations from January 1985 to June 1994 and to estimate the probability of OSHA inspection in general and OSHA citation for MSD hazards from October 1985 to September 1993. The mean and median values of proposed penalties were $47,707 and $3600 respectively. A substantial influence of 1991 changes to the penalty structure was noted with decreasing mean and increasing median penalty values. Penalty values increased with establishment size and were higher for unplanned than for planned inspections. The probability of a federal OSHA inspection for any establishment ranged from 1:50 in 1986 to 1:100 in 1993 whereas the estimated probability of an inspection with MSD-related citations ranged from 1:167,000 in 1996 to as much as 1:38,000 during the peak of enforcement activity in 1990. The probability of an inspection with MSD citations for the largest establishments during the period was more than 1000 times greater than that for the smallest. The results of this study may be utilized by organizations seeking to demonstrate the advantages of reducing musculoskeletal morbidity in the workplace.

Comparison of Journal Citation Reports and Scopus Impact Factors for Ecology and Environmental Sciences Journals

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gray, Edward; Hodkinson, Sarah Z.

2008-01-01

Impact factors for journals listed under the subject categories "ecology" and "environmental sciences" in the Journal Citation Reports database were calculated using citation data from the Scopus database. The journals were then ranked by their Scopus impact factor and compared to the ranked lists of the same journals derived from Journal…

Mapping cross-border collaboration and communication in cardiovascular research from 1992 to 2012.

PubMed

Gal, Diane; Glänzel, Wolfgang; Sipido, Karin R

2017-04-21

The growing burden of cardiovascular disease requires growth in research and innovation. We examine world-wide participation and citation impact across the cardiovascular research landscape from 1992 to 2012; we investigate cross-fertilization between countries and examine whether cross-border collaboration affects impact. State-of-the-art bibliometric methods and indicators are used to identify cardiovascular publications from the Web of Science, and to map trends over time in output, citation impact, and collaboration. The publication output in cardiovascular research has grown steadily from 1992 to 2012 with increased participation worldwide. China has the highest growth as relative share. The USA share initially predominated yet has reduced steadily. Over time, the EU-27 supra-national region has increased its participation above the USA, though on average it has not had greater citation impact than the USA. However, a number of European countries, as well as Australia and Canada, have improved their absolute and relative citation impact above that of the USA by 2006-2012. Europe is a hub of cross-fertilization with strengthening collaborations and strong citation links; the UK, Germany, and France remain central in this network. The USA has the highest number of strong citation links with other countries. All countries, but especially smaller, highly collaborative countries, have higher citation impact for their internationally collaborative research when compared with their domestic publications. Participation in cardiovascular research is growing but growth and impact show wide variability between countries. Cross-border collaboration is increasing, in particular within the EU, and is associated with greater citation impact. © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Prevalence and Citation Advantage of Gold Open Access in the Subject Areas of the Scopus Database

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Dorta-González, Pablo; Santana-Jiménez, Yolanda

2018-01-01

The potential benefit of open access (OA) in relation to citation impact has been discussed in the literature in depth. The methodology used to test the OA citation advantage includes comparing OA vs. non-OA journal impact factors and citations of OA vs. non-OA articles published in the same non-OA journals. However, one problem with many studies…

Prevalence and Impact of Self-Citation in Academic Orthopedic Surgery.

PubMed

Silvestre, Jason; Kamath, Atul F

2018-03-01

The h-index is a commonly utilized metric for academic productivity. Previous studies have proposed that self-citation may limit the utility of the h-index. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of self-citation on the h-index among orthopedic investigators. The study cohort consisted of program directors, chairpersons, and faculty at orthopedic surgery residency programs in the United States. The Scopus database was used to determine the h-index and number of citations ± self-citations. The total number of publications was correlated with the change in the h-index via self-citation. A total of 463 researchers were included (198 National Institutes of Health-funded faculty, 147 chairpersons, 118 program directors). Of these researchers, 83.8% cited previous work at least once (mean, 123.9 ± 277.6). Self-citations accounted for 5.8% of all citations. Including these citations increased the author h-index from 18.5 ± 14.9 to 19.2 ± 15.6 (P < .001). A minority of researchers (36.3%, P < .001) had increased their h-index via self-citation (range, 0-11). The proportional increase in the h-index via self-citation was positively related to the number of publications (P < .001). While the practice of self-citation is prevalent in orthopedics, its impact on the h-index is minimal for most researchers. With more publications, researchers can increase their h-index to a greater degree via self-citation.

References that anyone can edit: review of Wikipedia citations in peer reviewed health science literature

PubMed Central

Hladkowicz, Emily S; Pigford, Ashlee-Ann E; Ufholz, Lee-Anne; Postonogova, Tatyana; Shin, Eunkyung; Boet, Sylvain

2014-01-01

Objectives To examine indexed health science journals to evaluate the prevalence of Wikipedia citations, identify the journals that publish articles with Wikipedia citations, and determine how Wikipedia is being cited. Design Bibliometric analysis. Study selection Publications in the English language that included citations to Wikipedia were retrieved using the online databases Scopus and Web of Science. Data sources To identify health science journals, results were refined using Ulrich’s database, selecting for citations from journals indexed in Medline, PubMed, or Embase. Using Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports, 2011 impact factors were collected for all journals included in the search. Data extraction Resulting citations were thematically coded, and descriptive statistics were calculated. Results 1433 full text articles from 1008 journals indexed in Medline, PubMed, or Embase with 2049 Wikipedia citations were accessed. The frequency of Wikipedia citations has increased over time; most citations occurred after December 2010. More than half of the citations were coded as definitions (n=648; 31.6%) or descriptions (n=482; 23.5%). Citations were not limited to journals with a low or no impact factor; the search found Wikipedia citations in many journals with high impact factors. Conclusions Many publications are citing information from a tertiary source that can be edited by anyone, although permanent, evidence based sources are available. We encourage journal editors and reviewers to use caution when publishing articles that cite Wikipedia. PMID:24603564

The Scholarly Influence of Orthopaedic Research According to Conventional and Alternative Metrics: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Evaniew, Nathan; Adili, Anthony F; Ghert, Michelle; Khan, Moin; Madden, Kim; Smith, Christopher; Bhandari, Mohit

2017-05-01

Researchers are experiencing an innovative shift toward online distribution of their work, and metrics related to online scholarly influence are gaining importance. Our objectives were to determine which types of online activity are most prevalent in orthopaedics, to identify associated factors, and to explore a complementary approach to measuring overall scholarly influence using online activity and conventional citations. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials of surgical or nonsurgical interventions in participants with, or at specific risk for, injuries and diseases of the musculoskeletal system. We collected data on online activity in social media, mainstream media, blogs, forums, and other sources from a commercial provider of alternative metric data for medical journals. We tested associations with use of negative binomial regression. We identified 1,697 trials, published between 2011 and 2014, that had a total of 12,995 conventional citations and 15,068 online mentions. The median number of online mentions of each trial was 2 (interquartile range, 0 to 5). Twitter (82%) and Facebook (13%) mentions were the most prevalent types of online activity. Counts of online mentions correlated with conventional citations (r = 0.11, p < 0.01) but accumulated more rapidly. Higher total counts of online mentions were consistently associated with longer time since publication, higher journal impact factor, higher author h-index values, and less risk of bias (p < 0.01 for each). We found the best model fit for a complementary approach by weighting citations and online mentions equally. Online activity in orthopaedics is dominated by activity on Twitter and Facebook and is associated with increasing time since publication, journal impact factor, and author h-index values, and less risk of bias. Institutions, publishers, funding agencies, and clinicians may consider a complementary approach to measuring scholarly influence that weights online mentions and conventional citations equally.

Network Effects on Scientific Collaborations

PubMed Central

Uddin, Shahadat; Hossain, Liaquat; Rasmussen, Kim

2013-01-01

Background The analysis of co-authorship network aims at exploring the impact of network structure on the outcome of scientific collaborations and research publications. However, little is known about what network properties are associated with authors who have increased number of joint publications and are being cited highly. Methodology/Principal Findings Measures of social network analysis, for example network centrality and tie strength, have been utilized extensively in current co-authorship literature to explore different behavioural patterns of co-authorship networks. Using three SNA measures (i.e., degree centrality, closeness centrality and betweenness centrality), we explore scientific collaboration networks to understand factors influencing performance (i.e., citation count) and formation (tie strength between authors) of such networks. A citation count is the number of times an article is cited by other articles. We use co-authorship dataset of the research field of ‘steel structure’ for the year 2005 to 2009. To measure the strength of scientific collaboration between two authors, we consider the number of articles co-authored by them. In this study, we examine how citation count of a scientific publication is influenced by different centrality measures of its co-author(s) in a co-authorship network. We further analyze the impact of the network positions of authors on the strength of their scientific collaborations. We use both correlation and regression methods for data analysis leading to statistical validation. We identify that citation count of a research article is positively correlated with the degree centrality and betweenness centrality values of its co-author(s). Also, we reveal that degree centrality and betweenness centrality values of authors in a co-authorship network are positively correlated with the strength of their scientific collaborations. Conclusions/Significance Authors’ network positions in co-authorship networks influence the performance (i.e., citation count) and formation (i.e., tie strength) of scientific collaborations. PMID:23469021

The bibliometrics of atmospheric environment

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Brimblecombe, Peter; Grossi, Carlota M.

Bibliometric analysis is an important tool in the management of a journal. SCOPUS output is used to assess the increase in the quantity of material in Atmospheric Environment and stylistic changes in the way authors choose words and punctuation in titles and assemble their reference lists. Citation analysis is used to consider the impact factor of the journal, but perhaps more importantly the way in which it reflects the importance authors give to papers published in Atmospheric Environment. The impact factor of Atmospheric Environment (2.549 for 2007) from the Journal Citation Reports suggests it performs well within the atmospheric sciences, but it conceals the long term value authors place on papers appearing in the journal. Reference lists show that a fifth come through citing papers more than a decade old.

[Evaluation of "Japanese Journal of Psychology" using citation analysis].

PubMed

Kato, Tsukasa; Baba, Mamiko; Tabata, Naoya; Shimoda, Shunsuke; Fukuda, Mildki; Okubo, Nobutoshi

2013-06-01

This study investigated the professional impact of "Japanese Journal of Psychology." Thirty four psychological journals written in Japanese were selected to register articles in a new database. This database included approximately 23,900 articles published through 2010. Using citations extracted from the references and footnotes in these scholarly journals, the Psychology Citation Index for Japanese Papers was created. The citation impact factors in Japanese psychology was determined on the basis of the number of times a journal was cited, cumulative impact factors, and the cited half-life of the journal; five years was a valid period for impact factor of psychological journals in Japan. The changes in the 5-year impact factors of "Japanese Journal of Psychology" were reviewed by comparing it with other journals.

Lost in translation: the impact of publication language on citation frequency in the scientific dental literature.

PubMed

Poomkottayil, Deepak; Bornstein, Michael M; Sendi, Pedram

2011-01-28

Citation metrics are commonly used as a proxy for scientific merit and relevance. Papers published in English, however, may exhibit a higher citation frequency than research articles published in other languages, though this issue has not yet been investigated from a Swiss perspective where English is not the native language. To assess the impact of publication language on citation frequency we focused on oral surgery papers indexed in PubMed MEDLINE that were published by Swiss Dental Schools between 2002 and 2007. Citation frequency of research papers was extracted from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and Google Scholar database. A univariate and multivariate logistic regression model was used to assess the impact of publication language (English versus German/French) on citation frequency, adjusted for journal impact factor, number of authors and research topic. Papers published in English showed a 6 (ISI database) and 7 (Google Scholar) times higher odds for being cited than research articles published in German or French. Our results suggest that publication language substantially influences the citation frequency of a research paper. Researchers should publish their work in English to render them accessible to the international scientific community.

Identifying Anomalous Citations for Objective Evaluation of Scholarly Article Impact.

PubMed

Bai, Xiaomei; Xia, Feng; Lee, Ivan; Zhang, Jun; Ning, Zhaolong

2016-01-01

Evaluating the impact of a scholarly article is of great significance and has attracted great attentions. Although citation-based evaluation approaches have been widely used, these approaches face limitations e.g. in identifying anomalous citations patterns. This negligence would inevitably cause unfairness and inaccuracy to the article impact evaluation. In this study, in order to discover the anomalous citations and ensure the fairness and accuracy of research outcome evaluation, we investigate the citation relationships between articles using the following factors: collaboration times, the time span of collaboration, citing times and the time span of citing to weaken the relationship of Conflict of Interest (COI) in the citation network. Meanwhile, we study a special kind of COI, namely suspected COI relationship. Based on the COI relationship, we further bring forward the COIRank algorithm, an innovative scheme for accurately assessing the impact of an article. Our method distinguishes the citation strength, and utilizes PageRank and HITS algorithms to rank scholarly articles comprehensively. The experiments are conducted on the American Physical Society (APS) dataset. We find that about 80.88% articles contain contributed citations by co-authors in 26,366 articles and 75.55% articles among these articles are cited by the authors belonging to the same affiliation, indicating COI and suspected COI should not be ignored for evaluating impact of scientific papers objectively. Moreover, our experimental results demonstrate COIRank algorithm significantly outperforms the state-of-art solutions. The validity of our approach is verified by using the probability of Recommendation Intensity.

The impact of article length on the number of future citations: a bibliometric analysis of general medicine journals.

PubMed

Falagas, Matthew E; Zarkali, Angeliki; Karageorgopoulos, Drosos E; Bardakas, Vangelis; Mavros, Michael N

2013-01-01

The number of citations received is considered an index of study quality and impact. We aimed to examine the factors associated with the number of citations of published articles, focusing on the article length. Original human studies published in the first trimester of 2006 in 5 major General Medicine journals were analyzed with regard to the number of authors and of author-affiliated institutions, title and abstract word count, article length (number of print pages), number of bibliographic references, study design, and 2006 journal impact factor (JIF). A multiple linear regression model was employed to identify the variables independently associated with the number of article citations received through January 2012. On univariate analysis the JIF, number of authors, article length, study design (interventional/observational and prospective/retrospective), title and abstract word count, number of author-affiliated institutions, and number of references were all associated with the number of citations received. On multivariate analysis with the logarithm of citations as the dependent variable, only article length [regression coefficient: 14.64 (95% confidence intervals: (5.76-23.50)] and JIF [3.37 (1.80-4.948)] independently predicted the number of citations. The variance of citations explained by these parameters was 51.2%. In a sample of articles published in major General Medicine journals, in addition to journal impact factors, article length and number of authors independently predicted the number of citations. This may reflect a higher complexity level and quality of longer and multi-authored studies.

Citation Analysis of Iranian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences in ISI Web of Knowledge, Scopus, and Google Scholar.

PubMed

Zarifmahmoudi, Leili; Kianifar, Hamid Reza; Sadeghi, Ramin

2013-10-01

Citation tracking is an important method to analyze the scientific impact of journal articles and can be done through Scopus (SC), Google Scholar (GS), or ISI web of knowledge (WOS). In the current study, we analyzed the citations to 2011-2012 articles of Iranian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences (IJBMS) in these three resources. The relevant data from SC, GS, and WOS official websites. Total number of citations, their overlap and unique citations of these three recourses were evaluated. WOS and SC covered 100% and GS covered 97% of the IJBMS items. Totally, 37 articles were cited at least once in one of the studied resources. Total number of citations were 20, 30, and 59 in WOS, SC, and GS respectively. Forty citations of GS, 6 citation of SC, and 2 citations of WOS were unique. Every scientific resource has its own inaccuracies in providing citation analysis information. Citation analysis studies are better to be done each year to correct any inaccuracy as soon as possible. IJBMS has gained considerable scientific attention from wide range of high impact journals and through citation tracking method; this visibility can be traced more thoroughly.

[Bibliometric study of Actas Dermo-sifiliográficas (1984-2003) III. Analysis of bibliographic impact factors].

PubMed

Miralles, Julia; Ramos, José M; Ballester, Rosa; Belinchón, Isabel; Sevila, Amparo; Moragón, Manuel

2005-11-01

To quantify the impact factor of the journal Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas (AD) from 1986 to 1990 and from 1999 to 2003 and to identify the journal's citation pattern in those years. Citations obtained by AD in the periods from 1985-1990 and 1998-2003 for articles published from 1984 to 1989 and from 1997 to 2002 were collected using Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI). The number of times AD was cited doubled during the second period, increasing from 38 (period from 1985-1990) to 76 (period from 1998-2003). Considering the number of citations, AD's impact factor increased from 0.016 in 1986 to 0.040 in 2003. In both periods, citations corresponding to AD articles were included in a wide range of source journals, mainly dermatological publications abroad. The most referred journals in the second period were the Dutch publication Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (13 citations) and the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology (12 citations). Unlike the period from 1985 to 1990 when no Spanish journal cited AD, four Spanish publications mentioned AD in the second period: Revista clínica española (6 citations), Archivos de bronconeumología (4 citations), Medicina clínica (3 citations) and the journal Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiología clínica (1 citation). Citations mainly corresponded to articles published by Spanish authors (63.2 % in the 1985-1990 period and 81.6 % in the period from 1998 to 2003). Self-citation increased from 10.5 % (first period) to 31.6 % (second period). The impact factor of AD is low and not comparable to other publications included in the Dermatology and Venereal Diseases field from SCI. Our results confirm the low citation rate of AD by source journals in this repertory. However, the increase of this rate in recent years seems to indicate a higher Spanish presence in SCI due to an increasing number of publications corresponding to Spanish authors in international journals and the inclusion of some Spanish journals in this database.

Citation Mining: Integrating Text Mining and Bibliometrics for Research User Profiling.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kostoff, Ronald N.; del Rio, J. Antonio; Humenik, James A.; Garcia, Esther Ofilia; Ramirez, Ana Maria

2001-01-01

Discusses the importance of identifying the users and impact of research, and describes an approach for identifying the pathways through which research can impact other research, technology development, and applications. Describes a study that used citation mining, an integration of citation bibliometrics and text mining, on articles from the…

Scandinavian research in anaesthesiology 1981-2000: visibility and impact in EU and world context.

PubMed

Skram, U; Larsen, B; Ingwersen, P; Viby-Mogensen, J

2004-09-01

We wished to assess the development in number and impact of publications in anaesthesiology and intensive care medicine from 1981 to 2000 in the four Scandinavian countries: Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. For comparison, we also analyzed data from the UK and the Netherlands. Publication and citation data from 1981 to 2000 were gathered from National Science Indicators (2001), covering 33 journals indexed in Current Contents. Data were analyzed in running 5-year periods. The following informetric indicators were used: absolute number of publications; absolute number of citations; absolute citation impact (average number of citations per publication per 5-year period); citation impact relative to the European Union and the world; and the percentage of cited papers from each country. The annual number of publications from Denmark was stable over the 20-year period. Sweden increased its production by 35%, while the remaining four countries showed increases from 100% to 146%. Thus, Sweden and Denmark lost visibility within the European Union (EU) and in world context. The EU and world citation shares of Finland and Norway increased slightly, whereas those of Sweden, Denmark, the UK, and the Netherlands all declined significantly. The absolute citation impact (ACI) increased for all the four Scandinavian countries. The ACI of the Netherlands did not change and was surpassed by all the Scandinavian countries by 1994-98, while the UK finished below the other five countries. (1) The annual number of publications from Sweden, Norway, Finland, the UK, and the Netherlands increased after the late eighties, whereas the net publication output from Denmark was stagnant over the 20-year period investigated; (2) the international publication and citation visibility of Finland and Norway increased slightly, as opposed to the significant decrease seen by the other four countries; (3) judging from the increase in absolute and relative citation impact and in the percentage of cited papers, the recognition of publications from the four Scandinavian countries increased over the past 20 years.

Psychiatry and the Hirsch h-index: The relationship between journal impact factors and accrued citations.

PubMed

Hunt, Glenn E; Cleary, Michelle; Walter, Garry

2010-01-01

There is considerable debate on the use and abuse of journal impact factors and on selecting the most appropriate indicator to assess research outcome for an individual or group of scientists. Internet searches using Web of Science and Scopus were conducted to retrieve citation data for an individual in order to calculate nine variants of Hirsch's h-index. Citations to articles published in a wide range of psychiatric journals in the periods 1995-99 and 2000-05 were analyzed using Web of Science. Comparisons were made between journal impact factor, h-index of citations from publication to 2008, and the proportion of articles cited at least 30 or 50 times. For up to 14 years post-publication, there was a strong positive relationship between journal impact factor and h-index for citations received. Journal impact factor was also compared to the percentage of articles cited at least 30 or 50 times-a comparison that showed wide variations between journals with similar impact factors. This study found that 40%-50% of the articles published in the top ten psychiatry journals ranked by impact factor acquire 30 to 50 citations within ten to fifteen years. Despite certain flaws and weaknesses, the h-index provides a better way to assess long-term performance of articles or authors than using a journal's impact factor, and it provides an alternative way to assess a journal's long-term ranking.

Twitter Predicts Citation Rates of Ecological Research.

PubMed

Peoples, Brandon K; Midway, Stephen R; Sackett, Dana; Lynch, Abigail; Cooney, Patrick B

2016-01-01

The relationship between traditional metrics of research impact (e.g., number of citations) and alternative metrics (altmetrics) such as Twitter activity are of great interest, but remain imprecisely quantified. We used generalized linear mixed modeling to estimate the relative effects of Twitter activity, journal impact factor, and time since publication on Web of Science citation rates of 1,599 primary research articles from 20 ecology journals published from 2012-2014. We found a strong positive relationship between Twitter activity (i.e., the number of unique tweets about an article) and number of citations. Twitter activity was a more important predictor of citation rates than 5-year journal impact factor. Moreover, Twitter activity was not driven by journal impact factor; the 'highest-impact' journals were not necessarily the most discussed online. The effect of Twitter activity was only about a fifth as strong as time since publication; accounting for this confounding factor was critical for estimating the true effects of Twitter use. Articles in impactful journals can become heavily cited, but articles in journals with lower impact factors can generate considerable Twitter activity and also become heavily cited. Authors may benefit from establishing a strong social media presence, but should not expect research to become highly cited solely through social media promotion. Our research demonstrates that altmetrics and traditional metrics can be closely related, but not identical. We suggest that both altmetrics and traditional citation rates can be useful metrics of research impact.

Measuring scientific impact beyond academia: An assessment of existing impact metrics and proposed improvements.

PubMed

Ravenscroft, James; Liakata, Maria; Clare, Amanda; Duma, Daniel

2017-01-01

How does scientific research affect the world around us? Being able to answer this question is of great importance in order to appropriately channel efforts and resources in science. The impact by scientists in academia is currently measured by citation based metrics such as h-index, i-index and citation counts. These academic metrics aim to represent the dissemination of knowledge among scientists rather than the impact of the research on the wider world. In this work we are interested in measuring scientific impact beyond academia, on the economy, society, health and legislation (comprehensive impact). Indeed scientists are asked to demonstrate evidence of such comprehensive impact by authoring case studies in the context of the Research Excellence Framework (REF). We first investigate the extent to which existing citation based metrics can be indicative of comprehensive impact. We have collected all recent REF impact case studies from 2014 and we have linked these to papers in citation networks that we constructed and derived from CiteSeerX, arXiv and PubMed Central using a number of text processing and information retrieval techniques. We have demonstrated that existing citation-based metrics for impact measurement do not correlate well with REF impact results. We also consider metrics of online attention surrounding scientific works, such as those provided by the Altmetric API. We argue that in order to be able to evaluate wider non-academic impact we need to mine information from a much wider set of resources, including social media posts, press releases, news articles and political debates stemming from academic work. We also provide our data as a free and reusable collection for further analysis, including the PubMed citation network and the correspondence between REF case studies, grant applications and the academic literature.

Measuring scientific impact beyond academia: An assessment of existing impact metrics and proposed improvements

PubMed Central

Liakata, Maria; Clare, Amanda; Duma, Daniel

2017-01-01

How does scientific research affect the world around us? Being able to answer this question is of great importance in order to appropriately channel efforts and resources in science. The impact by scientists in academia is currently measured by citation based metrics such as h-index, i-index and citation counts. These academic metrics aim to represent the dissemination of knowledge among scientists rather than the impact of the research on the wider world. In this work we are interested in measuring scientific impact beyond academia, on the economy, society, health and legislation (comprehensive impact). Indeed scientists are asked to demonstrate evidence of such comprehensive impact by authoring case studies in the context of the Research Excellence Framework (REF). We first investigate the extent to which existing citation based metrics can be indicative of comprehensive impact. We have collected all recent REF impact case studies from 2014 and we have linked these to papers in citation networks that we constructed and derived from CiteSeerX, arXiv and PubMed Central using a number of text processing and information retrieval techniques. We have demonstrated that existing citation-based metrics for impact measurement do not correlate well with REF impact results. We also consider metrics of online attention surrounding scientific works, such as those provided by the Altmetric API. We argue that in order to be able to evaluate wider non-academic impact we need to mine information from a much wider set of resources, including social media posts, press releases, news articles and political debates stemming from academic work. We also provide our data as a free and reusable collection for further analysis, including the PubMed citation network and the correspondence between REF case studies, grant applications and the academic literature. PMID:28278243

Evaluating Academic Journals Using Impact Factor and Local Citation Score

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Chung, Hye-Kyung

2007-01-01

This study presents a method for journal collection evaluation using citation analysis. Cost-per-use (CPU) for each title is used to measure cost-effectiveness with higher CPU scores indicating cost-effective titles. Use data are based on the impact factor and locally collected citation score of each title and is compared to the cost of managing…

Top-100 Highest-Cited Original Articles in Ischemic Stroke: A Bibliometric Analysis.

PubMed

Malhotra, Konark; Saeed, Omar; Goyal, Nitin; Katsanos, Aristeidis H; Tsivgoulis, Georgios

2018-03-01

The total number of citations of a research article can be used to determine its impact on the scientific community. We aimed to identify the top-100 articles published on ischemic stroke and evaluate their characteristics. Based on the database of Journal Citation Reports, 934 journals were selected that published original ischemic stroke articles. We used Web of Science citation search tool to identify top-100 citation classics, i.e., articles with more than 400 citations, in the field of ischemic stroke. All original articles were evaluated for publication year, journal category, journal and its impact factor, number of total and annual citations, research topic, publishing country, and institutional affiliation. The top-100 citation classics in ischemic stroke were published from 1970 to 2015, with the decade of 1990-1999 contributing 47 articles of historical significance. Median of total citations and annual citations in our analysis were 625.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 851.3-494.5) and 35.7 (IQR 79.9-25.9), respectively. The majority of the articles originated from the United States (n = 57), focused over the medical management (n = 26), and were published in the New England Journal of Medicine or Stroke (n = 25 each) journals. The median impact factor for the journals that published top-100 ischemic stroke citation classics was 9.11 (IQR 21.49-6.11). Our list of top-100 citation classics specific to ischemic stroke provide a detailed insight into academic achievements, historical perspective and serves as a guide for the scientific progress in stroke. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Citation Analysis of Iranian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences in ISI Web of Knowledge, Scopus, and Google Scholar

PubMed Central

Zarifmahmoudi, Leili; Kianifar, Hamid Reza; Sadeghi, Ramin

2013-01-01

Objective(s): Citation tracking is an important method to analyze the scientific impact of journal articles and can be done through Scopus (SC), Google Scholar (GS), or ISI web of knowledge (WOS). In the current study, we analyzed the citations to 2011-2012 articles of Iranian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences (IJBMS) in these three resources. Material and Methods: The relevant data from SC, GS, and WOS official websites. Total number of citations, their overlap and unique citations of these three recourses were evaluated. Results: WOS and SC covered 100% and GS covered 97% of the IJBMS items. Totally, 37 articles were cited at least once in one of the studied resources. Total number of citations were 20, 30, and 59 in WOS, SC, and GS respectively. Forty citations of GS, 6 citation of SC, and 2 citations of WOS were unique. Conclusion: Every scientific resource has its own inaccuracies in providing citation analysis information. Citation analysis studies are better to be done each year to correct any inaccuracy as soon as possible. IJBMS has gained considerable scientific attention from wide range of high impact journals and through citation tracking method; this visibility can be traced more thoroughly. PMID:24379959

[Archivos de Bronconeumología: among the 3 Spanish medical journals with the highest national impact factors].

PubMed

Aleixandre Benavent, R; Valderrama Zurián, J C; Castellano Gómez, M; Simó Meléndez, R; Navarro Molina, C

2004-12-01

Citation analysis elucidates patterns of information consumption within professional communities. The aim of this study was to analyze the citations of 87 Spanish medical journals by calculating their impact factors and immediacy indices for 2001, and to estimate the importance of Archivos de Bronconeumología within the framework of Spanish medicine. Eighty-seven Spanish medical journals were included. All were listed in the Spanish Medical Index (Indice Medico Español) and in at least one of the following databases: MEDLINE, BIOSIS, EMBASE, or Science Citation Index. References to articles from 1999 through 2001 in citable articles from 2001 were analyzed. Using the method of the Institute for Scientific Information, we calculated the national impact factor and immediacy index for each journal. The journals with the highest national impact factors were Revista Española de Quimioterapia (0.894), Medicina Clínica (0.89), and Archivos de Bronconeumología (0.732). The self-citation percentage of Archivos de Bronconeumología was 18.3% and the immediacy index was 0.033. The impact factor obtained by Archivos de Bronconeumología confirms its importance in Spanish medicine and validates its inclusion as a source journal in Science Citation Index and Journal Citation Report.

Twitter predicts citation rates of ecological research

USGS Publications Warehouse

Peoples, Brandon K.; Midway, Stephen R.; Sackett, Dana K.; Lynch, Abigail; Cooney, Patrick B.

2016-01-01

The relationship between traditional metrics of research impact (e.g., number of citations) and alternative metrics (altmetrics) such as Twitter activity are of great interest, but remain imprecisely quantified. We used generalized linear mixed modeling to estimate the relative effects of Twitter activity, journal impact factor, and time since publication on Web of Science citation rates of 1,599 primary research articles from 20 ecology journals published from 2012–2014. We found a strong positive relationship between Twitter activity (i.e., the number of unique tweets about an article) and number of citations. Twitter activity was a more important predictor of citation rates than 5-year journal impact factor. Moreover, Twitter activity was not driven by journal impact factor; the ‘highest-impact’ journals were not necessarily the most discussed online. The effect of Twitter activity was only about a fifth as strong as time since publication; accounting for this confounding factor was critical for estimating the true effects of Twitter use. Articles in impactful journals can become heavily cited, but articles in journals with lower impact factors can generate considerable Twitter activity and also become heavily cited. Authors may benefit from establishing a strong social media presence, but should not expect research to become highly cited solely through social media promotion. Our research demonstrates that altmetrics and traditional metrics can be closely related, but not identical. We suggest that both altmetrics and traditional citation rates can be useful metrics of research impact.

Auto-correlation of journal impact factor for consensus research reporting statements: a cohort study.

PubMed

Shanahan, Daniel R

2016-01-01

Background. The Journal Citation Reports journal impact factors (JIFs) are widely used to rank and evaluate journals, standing as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field. However, numerous criticisms have been made of use of a JIF to evaluate importance. This problem is exacerbated when the use of JIFs is extended to evaluate not only the journals, but the papers therein. The purpose of this study was therefore to investigate the relationship between the number of citations and journal IF for identical articles published simultaneously in multiple journals. Methods. Eligible articles were consensus research reporting statements listed on the EQUATOR Network website that were published simultaneously in three or more journals. The correlation between the citation count for each article and the median journal JIF over the published period, and between the citation count and number of article accesses was calculated for each reporting statement. Results. Nine research reporting statements were included in this analysis, representing 85 articles published across 58 journals in biomedicine. The number of citations was strongly correlated to the JIF for six of the nine reporting guidelines, with moderate correlation shown for the remaining three guidelines (median r = 0.66, 95% CI [0.45-0.90]). There was also a strong positive correlation between the number of citations and the number of article accesses (median r = 0.71, 95% CI [0.5-0.8]), although the number of data points for this analysis were limited. When adjusted for the individual reporting guidelines, each logarithm unit of JIF predicted a median increase of 0.8 logarithm units of citation counts (95% CI [-0.4-5.2]), and each logarithm unit of article accesses predicted a median increase of 0.1 logarithm units of citation counts (95% CI [-0.9-1.4]). This model explained 26% of the variance in citations (median adjusted r (2) = 0.26, range 0.18-1.0). Conclusion. The impact factor of the journal in which a reporting statement was published was shown to influence the number of citations that statement will gather over time. Similarly, the number of article accesses also influenced the number of citations, although to a lesser extent than the impact factor. This demonstrates that citation counts are not purely a reflection of scientific merit and the impact factor is, in fact, auto-correlated.

On a Modern Philosophy of Evaluating Scientific Publications

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Guz, A. N.; Rushchitsky, J. J.; Chernyshenko, I. S.

2005-10-01

Current approaches to the citation analysis of scientific publications are outlined. Science Citation Index, Impact Factor, Immediacy Index, and the selection procedure for Essential Science Indicators—a relatively new citation analysis tool—are described. The new citation evaluation tool has yet not been discussed adequately by mechanicians

[National and international impact factor of Revista Española de Cardiología].

PubMed

Aleixandre Benavent, Rafael; Valderrama Zurián, Juan C; Castellano Gómez, Miguel; Miguel-Dasit, Alberto; Simó Meléndez, Raquel; Navarro Molina, Carolina

2004-12-01

The aim of this paper is to present the bibliometric indicators for Revista Española de Cardiologíathat were obtained from the "Potential impact factor of Spanish medical journals in 2001" study financed by the Spanish Ministerio de Educacion, Cultura y Deporte. Citations to Revista Española de Cardiología, its national and international impact factor, and its immediacy index were calculated with methods similar to those used by the Institute for Scientific Information. National indicators were based only on citations from 87 Spanish journals considered source journals, whereas international indicators were calculated on the basis of citations from both national journals and foreign source journals in the Science Citation Index. Revista Española de Cardiologíaobtained a national impact factor of 0.719 and an international impact factor of 0.837, placing it at the head of the ranking of Spanish medical journals.

Inaccurate Citations in Biomedical Journalism: Effect on the Impact Factor of the American Journal of Roentgenology.

PubMed

Karabulut, Nevzat

2017-03-01

The aim of this study is to investigate the frequency of incorrect citations and its effects on the impact factor of a specific biomedical journal: the American Journal of Roentgenology. The Cited Reference Search function of Thomson Reuters' Web of Science database (formerly the Institute for Scientific Information's Web of Knowledge database) was used to identify erroneous citations. This was done by entering the journal name into the Cited Work field and entering "2011-2012" into the Cited Year(s) field. The errors in any part of the inaccurately cited references (e.g., author names, title, year, volume, issue, and page numbers) were recorded, and the types of errors (i.e., absent, deficient, or mistyped) were analyzed. Erroneous citations were corrected using the Suggest a Correction function of the Web of Science database. The effect of inaccurate citations on the impact factor of the AJR was calculated. Overall, 183 of 1055 citable articles published in 2011-2012 were inaccurately cited 423 times (mean [± SD], 2.31 ± 4.67 times; range, 1-44 times). Of these 183 articles, 110 (60.1%) were web-only articles and 44 (24.0%) were print articles. The most commonly identified errors were page number errors (44.8%) and misspelling of an author's name (20.2%). Incorrect citations adversely affected the impact factor of the AJR by 0.065 in 2012 and by 0.123 in 2013. Inaccurate citations are not infrequent in biomedical journals, yet they can be detected and corrected using the Web of Science database. Although the accuracy of references is primarily the responsibility of authors, the journal editorial office should also define a periodic inaccurate citation check task and correct erroneous citations to reclaim unnecessarily lost credit.

Tweet success? Scientific communication correlates with increased citations in Ecology and Conservation

PubMed Central

Gilbert, Sophie L.; Ford, Adam T.

2018-01-01

Science communication is seen as critical for the disciplines of ecology and conservation, where research products are often used to shape policy and decision making. Scientists are increasing their online media communication, via social media and news. Such media engagement has been thought to influence or predict traditional metrics of scholarship, such as citation rates. Here, we measure the association between citation rates and the Altmetric Attention Score—an indicator of the amount and reach of the attention an article has received—along with other forms of bibliometric performance (year published, journal impact factor, and article type). We found that Attention Score was positively correlated with citation rates. However, in recent years, we detected increasing media exposure did not relate to the equivalent citations as in earlier years; signalling a diminishing return on investment. Citations correlated with journal impact factors up to ∼13, but then plateaued, demonstrating that maximizing citations does not require publishing in the highest-impact journals. We conclude that ecology and conservation researchers can increase exposure of their research through social media engagement and, simultaneously, enhance their performance under traditional measures of scholarly activity. PMID:29666750

Tweet success? Scientific communication correlates with increased citations in Ecology and Conservation.

PubMed

Lamb, Clayton T; Gilbert, Sophie L; Ford, Adam T

2018-01-01

Science communication is seen as critical for the disciplines of ecology and conservation, where research products are often used to shape policy and decision making. Scientists are increasing their online media communication, via social media and news. Such media engagement has been thought to influence or predict traditional metrics of scholarship, such as citation rates. Here, we measure the association between citation rates and the Altmetric Attention Score-an indicator of the amount and reach of the attention an article has received-along with other forms of bibliometric performance (year published, journal impact factor, and article type). We found that Attention Score was positively correlated with citation rates. However, in recent years, we detected increasing media exposure did not relate to the equivalent citations as in earlier years; signalling a diminishing return on investment. Citations correlated with journal impact factors up to ∼13, but then plateaued, demonstrating that maximizing citations does not require publishing in the highest-impact journals. We conclude that ecology and conservation researchers can increase exposure of their research through social media engagement and, simultaneously, enhance their performance under traditional measures of scholarly activity.

Open Access Meets Discoverability: Citations to Articles Posted to Academia.edu

PubMed Central

Niyazov, Yuri; Vogel, Carl; Price, Richard; Lund, Ben; Judd, David; Akil, Adnan; Mortonson, Michael; Schwartzman, Josh; Shron, Max

2016-01-01

Using matching and regression analyses, we measure the difference in citations between articles posted to Academia.edu and other articles from similar journals, controlling for field, impact factor, and other variables. Based on a sample size of 31,216 papers, we find that a paper in a median impact factor journal uploaded to Academia.edu receives 16% more citations after one year than a similar article not available online, 51% more citations after three years, and 69% after five years. We also found that articles also posted to Academia.edu had 58% more citations than articles only posted to other online venues, such as personal and departmental home pages, after five years. PMID:26886730

How to Rank Journals

PubMed Central

Bradshaw, Corey J. A.; Brook, Barry W.

2016-01-01

There are now many methods available to assess the relative citation performance of peer-reviewed journals. Regardless of their individual faults and advantages, citation-based metrics are used by researchers to maximize the citation potential of their articles, and by employers to rank academic track records. The absolute value of any particular index is arguably meaningless unless compared to other journals, and different metrics result in divergent rankings. To provide a simple yet more objective way to rank journals within and among disciplines, we developed a κ-resampled composite journal rank incorporating five popular citation indices: Impact Factor, Immediacy Index, Source-Normalized Impact Per Paper, SCImago Journal Rank and Google 5-year h-index; this approach provides an index of relative rank uncertainty. We applied the approach to six sample sets of scientific journals from Ecology (n = 100 journals), Medicine (n = 100), Multidisciplinary (n = 50); Ecology + Multidisciplinary (n = 25), Obstetrics & Gynaecology (n = 25) and Marine Biology & Fisheries (n = 25). We then cross-compared the κ-resampled ranking for the Ecology + Multidisciplinary journal set to the results of a survey of 188 publishing ecologists who were asked to rank the same journals, and found a 0.68–0.84 Spearman’s ρ correlation between the two rankings datasets. Our composite index approach therefore approximates relative journal reputation, at least for that discipline. Agglomerative and divisive clustering and multi-dimensional scaling techniques applied to the Ecology + Multidisciplinary journal set identified specific clusters of similarly ranked journals, with only Nature & Science separating out from the others. When comparing a selection of journals within or among disciplines, we recommend collecting multiple citation-based metrics for a sample of relevant and realistic journals to calculate the composite rankings and their relative uncertainty windows. PMID:26930052

How to Rank Journals.

PubMed

Bradshaw, Corey J A; Brook, Barry W

2016-01-01

There are now many methods available to assess the relative citation performance of peer-reviewed journals. Regardless of their individual faults and advantages, citation-based metrics are used by researchers to maximize the citation potential of their articles, and by employers to rank academic track records. The absolute value of any particular index is arguably meaningless unless compared to other journals, and different metrics result in divergent rankings. To provide a simple yet more objective way to rank journals within and among disciplines, we developed a κ-resampled composite journal rank incorporating five popular citation indices: Impact Factor, Immediacy Index, Source-Normalized Impact Per Paper, SCImago Journal Rank and Google 5-year h-index; this approach provides an index of relative rank uncertainty. We applied the approach to six sample sets of scientific journals from Ecology (n = 100 journals), Medicine (n = 100), Multidisciplinary (n = 50); Ecology + Multidisciplinary (n = 25), Obstetrics & Gynaecology (n = 25) and Marine Biology & Fisheries (n = 25). We then cross-compared the κ-resampled ranking for the Ecology + Multidisciplinary journal set to the results of a survey of 188 publishing ecologists who were asked to rank the same journals, and found a 0.68-0.84 Spearman's ρ correlation between the two rankings datasets. Our composite index approach therefore approximates relative journal reputation, at least for that discipline. Agglomerative and divisive clustering and multi-dimensional scaling techniques applied to the Ecology + Multidisciplinary journal set identified specific clusters of similarly ranked journals, with only Nature & Science separating out from the others. When comparing a selection of journals within or among disciplines, we recommend collecting multiple citation-based metrics for a sample of relevant and realistic journals to calculate the composite rankings and their relative uncertainty windows.

Visibility and Citation Impact

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ebrahim, Nader Ale; Salehi, Hadi; Embi, Mohamed Amin; Tanha, Farid Habibi; Gholizadeh, Hossein; Motahar, Seyed Mohammad

2014-01-01

The number of publications is the first criteria for assessing a researcher output. However, the main measurement for author productivity is the number of citations, and citations are typically related to the paper's visibility. In this paper, the relationship between article visibility and the number of citations is investigated. A case study of…

Effective Strategies for Increasing Citation Frequency

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ebrahim, Nader Ale; Salehi, Hadi; Embi, Mohamed Amin; Tanha, Farid Habibi; Gholizadeh, Hossein; Motahar, Seyed Mohammad; Ordi, Ali

2013-01-01

Due to the effect of citation impact on The Higher Education (THE) world university ranking system, most of the researchers are looking for some helpful techniques to increase their citation record. This paper by reviewing the relevant articles extracts 33 different ways for increasing the citations possibilities. The results show that the article…

A multi-objective decision-making approach to the journal submission problem.

PubMed

Wong, Tony E; Srikrishnan, Vivek; Hadka, David; Keller, Klaus

2017-01-01

When researchers complete a manuscript, they need to choose a journal to which they will submit the study. This decision requires to navigate trade-offs between multiple objectives. One objective is to share the new knowledge as widely as possible. Citation counts can serve as a proxy to quantify this objective. A second objective is to minimize the time commitment put into sharing the research, which may be estimated by the total time from initial submission to final decision. A third objective is to minimize the number of rejections and resubmissions. Thus, researchers often consider the trade-offs between the objectives of (i) maximizing citations, (ii) minimizing time-to-decision, and (iii) minimizing the number of resubmissions. To complicate matters further, this is a decision with multiple, potentially conflicting, decision-maker rationalities. Co-authors might have different preferences, for example about publishing fast versus maximizing citations. These diverging preferences can lead to conflicting trade-offs between objectives. Here, we apply a multi-objective decision analytical framework to identify the Pareto-front between these objectives and determine the set of journal submission pathways that balance these objectives for three stages of a researcher's career. We find multiple strategies that researchers might pursue, depending on how they value minimizing risk and effort relative to maximizing citations. The sequences that maximize expected citations within each strategy are generally similar, regardless of time horizon. We find that the "conditional impact factor"-impact factor times acceptance rate-is a suitable heuristic method for ranking journals, to strike a balance between minimizing effort objectives and maximizing citation count. Finally, we examine potential co-author tension resulting from differing rationalities by mapping out each researcher's preferred Pareto front and identifying compromise submission strategies. The explicit representation of trade-offs, especially when multiple decision-makers (co-authors) have different preferences, facilitates negotiations and can support the decision process.

A multi-objective decision-making approach to the journal submission problem

PubMed Central

Hadka, David; Keller, Klaus

2017-01-01

When researchers complete a manuscript, they need to choose a journal to which they will submit the study. This decision requires to navigate trade-offs between multiple objectives. One objective is to share the new knowledge as widely as possible. Citation counts can serve as a proxy to quantify this objective. A second objective is to minimize the time commitment put into sharing the research, which may be estimated by the total time from initial submission to final decision. A third objective is to minimize the number of rejections and resubmissions. Thus, researchers often consider the trade-offs between the objectives of (i) maximizing citations, (ii) minimizing time-to-decision, and (iii) minimizing the number of resubmissions. To complicate matters further, this is a decision with multiple, potentially conflicting, decision-maker rationalities. Co-authors might have different preferences, for example about publishing fast versus maximizing citations. These diverging preferences can lead to conflicting trade-offs between objectives. Here, we apply a multi-objective decision analytical framework to identify the Pareto-front between these objectives and determine the set of journal submission pathways that balance these objectives for three stages of a researcher’s career. We find multiple strategies that researchers might pursue, depending on how they value minimizing risk and effort relative to maximizing citations. The sequences that maximize expected citations within each strategy are generally similar, regardless of time horizon. We find that the “conditional impact factor”—impact factor times acceptance rate—is a suitable heuristic method for ranking journals, to strike a balance between minimizing effort objectives and maximizing citation count. Finally, we examine potential co-author tension resulting from differing rationalities by mapping out each researcher’s preferred Pareto front and identifying compromise submission strategies. The explicit representation of trade-offs, especially when multiple decision-makers (co-authors) have different preferences, facilitates negotiations and can support the decision process. PMID:28582430

Impact of Wikipedia on citation trends

PubMed Central

Marashi, Sayed-Amir; Hosseini-Nami, Seyed Mohammad Amin; Alishah, Khadijeh; Hadi, Mahdieh; Karimi, Ali; Hosseinian, Saeedeh; Ramezanifard, Rouhallah; Mirhassani, Reihaneh Sadat; Hosseini, Zhaleh; Shojaie, Zahra

2013-01-01

It has been suggested that the “visibility” of an article influences its citation count. More specifically, it is believed that the social media can influence article citations.Here we tested the hypothesis that inclusion of scholarly references in Wikipedia affects the citation trends. To perform this analysis, we introduced a citation “propensity” measure, which is inspired by the concept of amino acid propensity for protein secondary structures. We show that although citation counts generally increase during time, the citation “propensity” does not increase after inclusion of a reference in Wikipedia. PMID:27034629

Citation analysis of meta-analysis articles on posttraumatic stress disorder.

PubMed

Liao, Xi-Ming; Chen, Ping-Yan

2011-04-01

In the past two decades enormously scientific researches on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been undertaken and many related meta-analyses have been published. Citation analysis was used to get comprehensive perspectives of meta-analysis articles (MA articles) on PTSD for the purpose of facilitating the researchers, physicians and policy-makers to understand the PTSD. MA articles on PTSD in any languages from January 1980 to March 2009 were included if they presented meta-analytical methods and received at least one citation recorded in the Web of Science (WoS). Whereas studies, in which any effect sizes of PTSD were not distinguished from other psychological disorders, were excluded. Citations to and by identified MA articles were documented basing on records in WoS. Citation analysis was used to examine distribution patterns of characteristics and citation impact of MA articles on PTSD. Canonical analysis was used to explore the relationship between the characteristics of MA articles and citation impact. Thirty-four MA articles published during 1998 and 2008 were identified and revealed multiple study topics on PTSD: 10 (29.4%) were about epidemiology, 13 (38.2%) about treatment or intervention, 6 (17.6%) about pathophysiology or neurophysiology or neuroendocrine, 3 (8.8%) about childhood and 2 (5.9%) about psychosocial adversity. Two articles cited most frequently with 456 and 145 counts were published in Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology by Brewin (2000) and Psychological Bulletin by Ozer (2003), respectively. Mean cited count was 7.48 ± 10.56 and mean age (year 2009 minus article publication year) was (4.24 ± 2.91) years. They had been cited approximately by 67 disciplines and by authors from 42 countries or territories. Characteristics of meta-analysis highly correlated with citation impact and reflected by canonical correlation of 0.899 (P < 0.000 01). The age of MA articles predicted their citation impact. Citation analysis would serve to capture the global perspectives and topics of MA articles on PTSD.

[Confusing the confused: thoughts on impact factor, h(irsch) index, Q value, and other cofactors that influence the researcher's happiness].

PubMed

Quindós, Guillermo

2009-06-30

The need to evaluate curricula for sponsorship for research projects or professional promotion, has led to the search for tools that allow an objective valuation. However, the total number papers published, or citations of articles of a particular author, or the impact factor of the Journal where they are published are inadequate indicators for the evaluation of the quality and productivity of researchers. The h index, proposed by Hirsch, categorises the papers according to the number of citations per article. This tool appears to lack the limitations of other bibliometric tools but is less useful for non English-speaking authors. To propose and debate the usefulness of the existing bibliometric indicators and tools for the evaluation and categorization of researchers and scientific journals. Search for papers on bibliometric tools. There are some hot spots in the debate on the national and international evaluation of researchers' productivity and quality of scientific journals. Opinions on impact factors and h index have been discussed. The positive discrimination, using the Q value, is proposed as an alternative for the evaluation of Spanish and Iberoamerican researchers. It is very important de-mystify the importance of bibliometric indicators. The impact factor is useful for evaluating journals from the same scientific area but not for the evaluation of researchers' curricula. For the comparison of curricula from two or more researchers, we must use the h index or the proposed Q value. the latter allows positive discrimination of the task for Spanish and Iberoamerican researchers.

An exploratory analysis of PubMed's free full-text limit on citation retrieval for clinical questions.

PubMed

Krieger, Mary M; Richter, Randy R; Austin, Tricia M

2008-10-01

The research sought to determine (1) how use of the PubMed free full-text (FFT) limit affects citation retrieval and (2) how use of the FFT limit impacts the types of articles and levels of evidence retrieved. Four clinical questions based on a research agenda for physical therapy were searched in PubMed both with and without the use of the FFT limit. Retrieved citations were examined for relevancy to each question. Abstracts of relevant citations were reviewed to determine the types of articles and levels of evidence. Descriptive analysis was used to compare the total number of citations, number of relevant citations, types of articles, and levels of evidence both with and without the use of the FFT limit. Across all 4 questions, the FFT limit reduced the number of citations to 11.1% of the total number of citations retrieved without the FFT limit. Additionally, high-quality evidence such as systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials were missed when the FFT limit was used. Health sciences librarians play a key role in educating users about the potential impact the FFT limit has on the number of citations, types of articles, and levels of evidence retrieved.

[SOME CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT THE INTRINSIC VALUE OF THE IMPACT FACTOR OF SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS].

PubMed

Franco-López, Ángeles; González-Gallego, Javier; Sanz-Valero, Javier; Tuñón, María Jesús; García-De-Lorenzo, Abelardo; Culebras, Jesús M

2015-12-01

The reason of higher number of citations of some articles is discussed. Some considerations about the journals' impact factor, its merits and its pitfalls are also made. Scientific journals' impact factor, popularized by the Institute for Scientific Information, has become an objective parameter for authors' evaluation and also for institutions and other related circumstances. There is no reason for the impact factor's gap between some English journals and those written in other languages. English journals probably benefit of the "Mathew's effect", according to which eminent scientists are more rewarded by similar contributions than others less known. It is paradoxical that most of the major achievements of our age do not appear among the 100 most cited articles. There is no homogeneity among all the articles appearing in each scientific journal: half of the articles are cited ten times more than the other half. However, those articles cited 0 times are credited like the better ones. Each article should be evaluated by its own citations, which would be its impact factor; the authors should be evaluated by their H index. Copyright AULA MEDICA EDICIONES 2014. Published by AULA MEDICA. All rights reserved.

Scientific citations favor positive results: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PubMed

Duyx, Bram; Urlings, Miriam J E; Swaen, Gerard M H; Bouter, Lex M; Zeegers, Maurice P

2017-08-01

Citation bias concerns the selective citation of scientific articles based on their results. We brought together all available evidence on citation bias across scientific disciplines and quantified its impact. An extensive search strategy was applied to the Web of Science Core Collection and Medline, yielding 52 studies in total. We classified these studies on scientific discipline, selection method, and other variables. We also performed random-effects meta-analyses to pool the effect of positive vs. negative results on subsequent citations. Finally, we checked for other determinants of citation as reported in the citation bias literature. Evidence for the occurrence of citation bias was most prominent in the biomedical sciences and least in the natural sciences. Articles with statistically significant results were cited 1.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-1.8) times more often than articles with nonsignificant results. Articles in which the authors explicitly conclude to have found support for their hypothesis were cited 2.7 (CI 2.0-3.7) times as often. Article results and journal impact factor were associated with citation more often than any other reported determinant. Similar to what we already know on publication bias, also citation bias can lead to an overrepresentation of positive results and unfounded beliefs. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Ecosystems: Issues and problems. (Latest citations from the ABI/Inform database). Published Search

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

NONE

The bibliography contains citations concerning issues and problems relating to ecosystems in different parts of the world. Preservation of resources, environmental protection, industrial impacts on ecosystems, ecological economics, biodiversity of specific ecosystems, and effects of deforestation and erosion are examined. Citations review impacts of human inhabitants, eco-tourism, and alien species on an ecosystem. The relationship to an ecosystem of pests and microbial infections is covered, and long-range planning for ecosystems is cited. (Contains 50-250 citations and includes a subject term index and title list.) (Copyright NERAC, Inc. 1995)

Tweeting birds: online mentions predict future citations in ornithology

PubMed Central

O'Hanlon, Nina; Dudley, Steve P.

2017-01-01

The rapid growth of online tools to communicate scientific research raises the important question of whether online attention is associated with citations in the scholarly literature. The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) quantifies the attention received by a scientific publication on various online platforms including news, blogs and social media. It has been advanced as a rapid way of gauging the impact of a piece of research, both in terms of potential future scholarly citations and wider online engagement. Here, we explore variation in the AAS of 2677 research articles published in 10 ornithological journals between 2012 and 2016. On average, AAS increased sevenfold in just five years, primarily due to increased activity on Twitter which contributed 75% of the total score. For a subset of 878 articles published in 2014, including an additional 323 ornithology articles from non-specialist journals, an increase in AAS from 1 to 20 resulted in a predicted 112% increase in citation count from 2.6 to 5.5 citations per article. This effect interacted with journal impact factor, with weaker effects of AAS in higher impact factor journals. Our results suggest that altmetrics (or the online activity they measure), as well as complementing traditional measures of scholarly impact in ornithology such as citations, may also anticipate or even drive them. PMID:29291121

The International Impact of Education Research Done and Published in South Africa

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wolhuter, Charl

2011-01-01

The aim of this article was to determine the international impact of Education research in South Africa, through a citation analysis of articles published in the "South African Journal of Education" from 2000 to 2010 The citation impact (nationally as well as internationally) was found to be low. The international impact has been…

The citation merit of scientific publications.

PubMed

Crespo, Juan A; Ortuño-Ortín, Ignacio; Ruiz-Castillo, Javier

2012-01-01

We propose a new method to assess the merit of any set of scientific papers in a given field based on the citations they receive. Given a field and a citation impact indicator, such as the mean citation or the [Formula: see text]-index, the merit of a given set of [Formula: see text] articles is identified with the probability that a randomly drawn set of [Formula: see text] articles from a given pool of articles in that field has a lower citation impact according to the indicator in question. The method allows for comparisons between sets of articles of different sizes and fields. Using a dataset acquired from Thomson Scientific that contains the articles published in the periodical literature in the period 1998-2007, we show that the novel approach yields rankings of research units different from those obtained by a direct application of the mean citation or the [Formula: see text]-index.

What Do Citation Patterns Reveal about the Outdoor Education Field? A Snapshot 2000-2013

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Brookes, Andrew; Stewart, Alistair

2016-01-01

This study considered what insights into outdoor education (OE) research and scholarship could be gleaned from citation indices and patterns. Citation indices have long been used as ranking tools in the physical sciences, and more recently have been used in humanities and social sciences. High citation measures indicate high research impact,…

Are Shorter Article Titles More Attractive for Citations? Cross-sectional Study of 22 Scientific Journals

PubMed Central

Habibzadeh, Farrokh; Yadollahie, Mahboobeh

2010-01-01

Aim To investigate the correlation between the length of the title of a scientific article and the number of citations it receives, in view of the common editorial call for shorter titles. Methods Title and the number of citations to all articles published in 2005 in 22 arbitrarily chosen English-language journals (n = 9031) were retrieved from citation database Scopus. The 2008 journal impact factors of these 22 journals were also retrieved from Thomson Reuters’ Journal Citation Report (JCR). Assuming the article title length as the independent variable, and the number of citations to the article as the dependent variable, a linear regression model was applied. Results The slope of the regression line for some journals (n = 6, when titles were measured in characters but 7 when titles were measured in words) was negative – none was significantly different from 0. The overall slope for all journals was 0.140 (when titles were measured in characters) and 0.778 (when titles were measured in words), significantly different from 0 (P < 0.001). Overall, articles with longer titles received more citations – Spearman ρ = 0.266 – when titles were measured in characters, and ρ = 0.244 when titles were measured in words (P < 0.001). This association was found for 7 of 8 journals with impact factor >10 and for 2 out of 14 journals with impact factor <10 (P < 0.001, Fisher exact test). Conclusion Longer titles seem to be associated with higher citation rates. This association is more pronounced for journals with high impact factors. Editors who insist on brief and concise titles should perhaps update the guidelines for authors of their journals and have more flexibility regarding the length of the title. PMID:20401960

Macromolecule mass spectrometry: citation mining of user documents.

PubMed

Kostoff, Ronald N; Bedford, Clifford D; del Río, J Antonio; Cortes, Héctor D; Karypis, George

2004-03-01

Identifying research users, applications, and impact is important for research performers, managers, evaluators, and sponsors. Identification of the user audience and the research impact is complex and time consuming due to the many indirect pathways through which fundamental research can impact applications. This paper identified the literature pathways through which two highly-cited papers of 2002 Chemistry Nobel Laureates Fenn and Tanaka impacted research, technology development, and applications. Citation Mining, an integration of citation bibliometrics and text mining, was applied to the >1600 first generation Science Citation Index (SCI) citing papers to Fenn's 1989 Science paper on Electrospray Ionization for Mass Spectrometry, and to the >400 first generation SCI citing papers to Tanaka's 1988 Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry paper on Laser Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry. Bibliometrics was performed on the citing papers to profile the user characteristics. Text mining was performed on the citing papers to identify the technical areas impacted by the research, and the relationships among these technical areas.

[Bibliometric analysis of IBERPOC and EPI-SCAN studies. Contribution of the smoking variable on the iberpoc study].

PubMed

de Granda-Orive, J I; Alonso-Arroyo, A; López-Padilla, D; Segrelles-Calvo, G; Jiménez-Ruiz, C A; Solano-Reina, S

2018-03-01

The aim of this study was to perform a bibliometric analysis of EPI-SCAN and IBERPOC studies using the Science Citation Index and Scopus databases, and to determine the overall impact with the impact of smoking on IBERPOC as a secondary objective. A general searching was conducted in Science Citation Index-Expanded through the Web of Science (WoS) (Thomson Reuters) platform and Scopus on 23 March 2015. The search strategy included the terms "iberpoc" OR "episcan" was performed on 15 October 2015. A total of 24 publications were obtained; 13 from IBERPOC study (9 on "COPD" and 4 for "tobacco"), with 11 from the EPI-SCAN (All COPD) study. A total of 841 WoS citations were obtained (445 IBERPOC [99 of tobacco]), and 1,442 from Scopus (963 IBERPOC [144 tobacco]). The theme "tobacco" contributed with 22.24% and 14.95% of total citations in WoS and Scopus, respectively to the IBERPOC study. It was found that Scopus citations were newer, and a similar impact from both WoS studies was detected, although the IBERPOC impact was greater in Scopus. Collaborative networks of institutions and authors of both studies were identified. There is an important productivity and impact of both studies. Scopus citations are newer than those in WoS. The "tobacco" variable added IBERPOC impact and visibility. There was high density, accessibility, and cohesion in collaborative networks of both studies. Copyright © 2017 Sociedad Española de Médicos de Atención Primaria (SEMERGEN). Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Social media and online attention as an early measure of the impact of research in solid organ transplantation.

PubMed

Knight, Simon R

2014-09-15

Traditional measures of the impact of published research, such as citation counts, are limited to measuring academic impact. The use of social media and other online tools as alternative measures of research impact is gaining popularity and used by leading medical journals. MEDLINE was searched for articles published with subject headings relating to solid organ transplantation between August 1, 2011, and July 31, 2012. Citation data were retrieved from SCOPUS, and statistics regarding mentions in social media, social bookmarking sites, news outlets, and expert recommendation sites were retrieved from the data at www.altmetric.com. Data were analyzed for associations between alternative metric data and citation rates. The search retrieved 6,981 publications. Sixty-six percent of the articles had at least one citation. Mentions in social media were 19.3%, 13.1% had social bookmarks, 0.9% had expert recommendations, and online news outlets picked up eight articles. Significantly higher citation rates were associated with mention in social media, expert recommendation, social bookmarking, and for articles identified as meta-analyses, multicenter studies, randomized controlled trials, and reviews (all P<0.001). The odds of an article being highly cited were significantly increased by a mention in social media (odds ratio, 2.58; P<0.001). Qualitative analysis suggests that article topics discussed on social media are more likely to relate to the more controversial and emotive areas of transplantation. Social media and online attention act as early predictors of the impact of transplant research as measured by later citation rate. Blogging and expert recommendation, in particular, are associated with higher citation rates.

Honorary authorship epidemic in scholarly publications? How the current use of citation-based evaluative metrics make (pseudo)honorary authors from honest contributors of every multi-author article.

PubMed

Kovacs, Jozsef

2013-08-01

The current use of citation-based metrics to evaluate the research output of individual researchers is highly discriminatory because they are uniformly applied to authors of single-author articles as well as contributors of multi-author papers. In the latter case, these quantitative measures are counted, as if each contributor were the single author of the full article. In this way, each and every contributor is assigned the full impact-factor score and all the citations that the article has received. This has a multiplication effect on each contributor's citation-based evaluative metrics of multi-author articles, because the more contributors an article has, the more undeserved credit is assigned to each of them. In this paper, I argue that this unfair system could be made fairer by requesting the contributors of multi-author articles to describe the nature of their contribution, and to assign a numerical value to their degree of relative contribution. In this way, we could create a contribution-specific index of each contributor for each citation metric. This would be a strong disincentive against honorary authorship and publication cartels, because it would transform the current win-win strategy of accepting honorary authors in the byline into a zero-sum game for each contributor.

Can Tweets Predict Citations? Metrics of Social Impact Based on Twitter and Correlation with Traditional Metrics of Scientific Impact

PubMed Central

2011-01-01

Background Citations in peer-reviewed articles and the impact factor are generally accepted measures of scientific impact. Web 2.0 tools such as Twitter, blogs or social bookmarking tools provide the possibility to construct innovative article-level or journal-level metrics to gauge impact and influence. However, the relationship of the these new metrics to traditional metrics such as citations is not known. Objective (1) To explore the feasibility of measuring social impact of and public attention to scholarly articles by analyzing buzz in social media, (2) to explore the dynamics, content, and timing of tweets relative to the publication of a scholarly article, and (3) to explore whether these metrics are sensitive and specific enough to predict highly cited articles. Methods Between July 2008 and November 2011, all tweets containing links to articles in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) were mined. For a subset of 1573 tweets about 55 articles published between issues 3/2009 and 2/2010, different metrics of social media impact were calculated and compared against subsequent citation data from Scopus and Google Scholar 17 to 29 months later. A heuristic to predict the top-cited articles in each issue through tweet metrics was validated. Results A total of 4208 tweets cited 286 distinct JMIR articles. The distribution of tweets over the first 30 days after article publication followed a power law (Zipf, Bradford, or Pareto distribution), with most tweets sent on the day when an article was published (1458/3318, 43.94% of all tweets in a 60-day period) or on the following day (528/3318, 15.9%), followed by a rapid decay. The Pearson correlations between tweetations and citations were moderate and statistically significant, with correlation coefficients ranging from .42 to .72 for the log-transformed Google Scholar citations, but were less clear for Scopus citations and rank correlations. A linear multivariate model with time and tweets as significant predictors (P < .001) could explain 27% of the variation of citations. Highly tweeted articles were 11 times more likely to be highly cited than less-tweeted articles (9/12 or 75% of highly tweeted article were highly cited, while only 3/43 or 7% of less-tweeted articles were highly cited; rate ratio 0.75/0.07 = 10.75, 95% confidence interval, 3.4–33.6). Top-cited articles can be predicted from top-tweeted articles with 93% specificity and 75% sensitivity. Conclusions Tweets can predict highly cited articles within the first 3 days of article publication. Social media activity either increases citations or reflects the underlying qualities of the article that also predict citations, but the true use of these metrics is to measure the distinct concept of social impact. Social impact measures based on tweets are proposed to complement traditional citation metrics. The proposed twimpact factor may be a useful and timely metric to measure uptake of research findings and to filter research findings resonating with the public in real time. PMID:22173204

Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact.

PubMed

Eysenbach, Gunther

2011-12-19

Citations in peer-reviewed articles and the impact factor are generally accepted measures of scientific impact. Web 2.0 tools such as Twitter, blogs or social bookmarking tools provide the possibility to construct innovative article-level or journal-level metrics to gauge impact and influence. However, the relationship of the these new metrics to traditional metrics such as citations is not known. (1) To explore the feasibility of measuring social impact of and public attention to scholarly articles by analyzing buzz in social media, (2) to explore the dynamics, content, and timing of tweets relative to the publication of a scholarly article, and (3) to explore whether these metrics are sensitive and specific enough to predict highly cited articles. Between July 2008 and November 2011, all tweets containing links to articles in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) were mined. For a subset of 1573 tweets about 55 articles published between issues 3/2009 and 2/2010, different metrics of social media impact were calculated and compared against subsequent citation data from Scopus and Google Scholar 17 to 29 months later. A heuristic to predict the top-cited articles in each issue through tweet metrics was validated. A total of 4208 tweets cited 286 distinct JMIR articles. The distribution of tweets over the first 30 days after article publication followed a power law (Zipf, Bradford, or Pareto distribution), with most tweets sent on the day when an article was published (1458/3318, 43.94% of all tweets in a 60-day period) or on the following day (528/3318, 15.9%), followed by a rapid decay. The Pearson correlations between tweetations and citations were moderate and statistically significant, with correlation coefficients ranging from .42 to .72 for the log-transformed Google Scholar citations, but were less clear for Scopus citations and rank correlations. A linear multivariate model with time and tweets as significant predictors (P < .001) could explain 27% of the variation of citations. Highly tweeted articles were 11 times more likely to be highly cited than less-tweeted articles (9/12 or 75% of highly tweeted article were highly cited, while only 3/43 or 7% of less-tweeted articles were highly cited; rate ratio 0.75/0.07 = 10.75, 95% confidence interval, 3.4-33.6). Top-cited articles can be predicted from top-tweeted articles with 93% specificity and 75% sensitivity. Tweets can predict highly cited articles within the first 3 days of article publication. Social media activity either increases citations or reflects the underlying qualities of the article that also predict citations, but the true use of these metrics is to measure the distinct concept of social impact. Social impact measures based on tweets are proposed to complement traditional citation metrics. The proposed twimpact factor may be a useful and timely metric to measure uptake of research findings and to filter research findings resonating with the public in real time.

Examining the Impact of Chemistry Education Research Articles from 2007 through 2013 by Citation Counts

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ye, Li; Lewis, Scott E.; Raker, Jeffrey R.; Oueini, Razanne

2015-01-01

Evaluating the impact of Chemistry Education Research articles has historically centered on the impact factor of the publishing journal. With the advent of electronic journal indices, it is possible to determine the impact of individual research articles by the number of citations it has received. However, in a relatively new discipline, such as…

An exploratory analysis of PubMed's free full-text limit on citation retrieval for clinical questions

PubMed Central

Krieger, Mary M.; Richter, Randy R.; Austin, Tricia M.

2008-01-01

Objective: The research sought to determine (1) how use of the PubMed free full-text (FFT) limit affects citation retrieval and (2) how use of the FFT limit impacts the types of articles and levels of evidence retrieved. Methods: Four clinical questions based on a research agenda for physical therapy were searched in PubMed both with and without the use of the FFT limit. Retrieved citations were examined for relevancy to each question. Abstracts of relevant citations were reviewed to determine the types of articles and levels of evidence. Descriptive analysis was used to compare the total number of citations, number of relevant citations, types of articles, and levels of evidence both with and without the use of the FFT limit. Results: Across all 4 questions, the FFT limit reduced the number of citations to 11.1% of the total number of citations retrieved without the FFT limit. Additionally, high-quality evidence such as systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials were missed when the FFT limit was used. Conclusions: Health sciences librarians play a key role in educating users about the potential impact the FFT limit has on the number of citations, types of articles, and levels of evidence retrieved. PMID:18974812

39 CFR 3010.12 - Contents of notice of rate adjustment.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... information must be supported by workpapers in which all calculations are shown and all input values, including all relevant CPI-U values, are listed with citations to the original sources. (2) A schedule... input values, including current rates, new rates, and billing determinants, are listed with citations to...

Self- And Cross-Citations in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis and the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior: 1993-2003

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Elliott, Amy J.; Morgan, Kineta; Fuqua, R. Wayne; Ehrhardt, Kristal; Poling, Alan

2005-01-01

Self- and cross-citations in JABA and JEAB from 1993 through 2003 were examined. Yearly mean levels of self-citation for JABA and JEAB were 34.9% and 33.2%, respectively. Overall, 7.8% of JABA citations were JEAB articles, and 0.6% of JEAB citations were JABA articles. The former value, but not the latter, is substantially higher than the…

An increasing citation black hole in ecology and evolution

PubMed Central

Rafferty, Anthony R; Wong, Bob B M; Chapple, David G

2015-01-01

Citations published in online supplementary material (OSM) are invisible to search engines used to calculate citation counts, potentially negatively impacting popular performance indices and journal rankings that rely on citation counts for quantification. To quantify the number of citations that are “lost” in OSM, we conducted a systematic survey of supplementary citation practices in four high-ranking, society-run journals from two geographical locations (Europe and North America). In 2012, 6% of all citations were only included in the OSM and were therefore not included in citation counts. We found a significant increase in the number of references invisible to citation counting services over the last two decades. A solution to this problem is urgently required and could include journal indexing of citations in OSM or the inclusion of all references in the main text. PMID:25628876

Reflections on relevance: Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics in 2004.

PubMed

Balon, Richard

2005-01-01

Relevance of an article is a highly desirable yet hardly predictable quality at the time of its publication. Article relevance is frequently measured by the impact factor of the journal where the article is published. Furthermore, impact factor, citation index and citation analysis are used as a measure of research progress and scientific wealth of a nation. The wisdom and significance of this approach to relevance is debatable and thus discussed here. In 2004, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics published a variety of articles which, in the author's view, are clinically relevant. Several selected clinically relevant issues reviewed in this article include: the conceptualization of fibromyalgia as a stress disorder; the psychosocial impact and psychosocial interventions in cancer; the impact of alexithymia on patient care; the possible relationship between depression and nutrition (namely intake of folate and pyridoxal phosphate); the significance of hypercoagulability in panic-like anxiety; the questionable value of single isomer drugs, and the relevance and adequacy of clinimetrics versus psychometrics in clinical research. The reviewed issues seem to be relevant to clinical practice, research or both, but also to our critical thinking, and the critical review of the developments in psychiatry and psychology. Copyright 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel.

PubFocus: semantic MEDLINE/PubMed citations analytics through integration of controlled biomedical dictionaries and ranking algorithm

PubMed Central

Plikus, Maksim V; Zhang, Zina; Chuong, Cheng-Ming

2006-01-01

Background Understanding research activity within any given biomedical field is important. Search outputs generated by MEDLINE/PubMed are not well classified and require lengthy manual citation analysis. Automation of citation analytics can be very useful and timesaving for both novices and experts. Results PubFocus web server automates analysis of MEDLINE/PubMed search queries by enriching them with two widely used human factor-based bibliometric indicators of publication quality: journal impact factor and volume of forward references. In addition to providing basic volumetric statistics, PubFocus also prioritizes citations and evaluates authors' impact on the field of search. PubFocus also analyses presence and occurrence of biomedical key terms within citations by utilizing controlled vocabularies. Conclusion We have developed citations' prioritisation algorithm based on journal impact factor, forward referencing volume, referencing dynamics, and author's contribution level. It can be applied either to the primary set of PubMed search results or to the subsets of these results identified through key terms from controlled biomedical vocabularies and ontologies. NCI (National Cancer Institute) thesaurus and MGD (Mouse Genome Database) mammalian gene orthology have been implemented for key terms analytics. PubFocus provides a scalable platform for the integration of multiple available ontology databases. PubFocus analytics can be adapted for input sources of biomedical citations other than PubMed. PMID:17014720

Geographic bias in citation rates of conservation research.

PubMed

Meijaard, Erik; Cardillo, Marcel; Meijaard, Emily M; Possingham, Hugh P

2015-06-01

We investigated whether the impact of conservation science is greater for research conducted in countries with more pressing conservation problems. We quantified research impact for 231 countries based on 2 citation metrics (mean cites per paper and h index) and fitted models predicting research impact based on number of threatened bird and mammal species (as a measure of conservation importance of a country) and a range of demographic variables. Citation rates of conservation research increased as a country's conservation need increased and as human population, quality of governance, and wealth increased. Even after accounting for these factors, citation rates among regions and countries within regions varied significantly. The conservation research community needs to consider ways to begin addressing the entrenched disadvantages some countries have when it comes to initiating projects and producing high-quality research. © 2015 Society for Conservation Biology.

Plenary presentations and public citations from The American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

PubMed

Kamel, Mohamed; Terasaki, Yusuke; Adusumilli, Prasad S; Stiles, Brendon M

2016-01-01

We examined the impact of work presented in the plenary sessions at the meeting of The American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS), by determining how frequently the published papers corresponding to the session presentations during the past 20 years, were cited; those that were most cited were identified. We reviewed the AATS meeting programs from the 20-year period from 1994 to 2014 and identified the corresponding publications in the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (JTCVS) from all abstracts presented at the plenary sessions. Papers were categorized as cardiac, thoracic, or congenital. References were evaluated for subsequent citation in the Web of Science (WoS), and Google Scholar (GS). We determined both the median number of citations overall, and per year. For comparison, we evaluated numbers of citations in WoS from current JTCVS papers in issues containing the 3 most-cited plenary session papers. Among 195 published plenary papers, the median number of citations in WoS and GS was 49 and 76, respectively. The median total number of citations in WoS was as follows: 51 for cardiac-category papers (n = 105); 61 for thoracic (n = 55), and 41 for congenital (n = 35). These values were higher than the median total number of citations for contemporary nonplenary JTCVS papers: cardiac (22, n = 55; P < .001); thoracic (31.5, n = 8; P = .183); and congenital (15.5, n = 24; P = .002) papers published in JTCVS. The median number of citations per year since publication for plenary publications was 5.9 (cardiac), 6 (thoracic), and 3.7 (congenital), respectively. Publications corresponding to the plenary sessions of the AATS are highly cited and include some of the seminal studies in our field in the past 20 years. Copyright © 2016 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Data Publications Correlate with Citation Impact.

PubMed

Leitner, Florian; Bielza, Concha; Hill, Sean L; Larrañaga, Pedro

2016-01-01

Neuroscience and molecular biology have been generating large datasets over the past years that are reshaping how research is being conducted. In their wake, open data sharing has been singled out as a major challenge for the future of research. We conducted a comparative study of citations of data publications in both fields, showing that the average publication tagged with a data-related term by the NCBI MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) curators achieves a significantly larger citation impact than the average in either field. We introduce a new metric, the data article citation index (DAC-index), to identify the most prolific authors among those data-related publications. The study is fully reproducible from an executable Rmd (R Markdown) script together with all the citation datasets. We hope these results can encourage authors to more openly publish their data.

100 classic papers of interventional radiology: A citation analysis.

PubMed

Crockett, Matthew T; Browne, Ronan Fj; MacMahon, Peter J; Lawler, Leo

2015-04-28

To define the 100 citation classic papers of interventional radiology. Using the database of Journal Citation Reports the 40 highest impact factor radiology journals were chosen. From these journals the 100 most cited interventional radiology papers were chosen and analysed. The top paper received 2497 citations and the 100(th) paper 200 citations. The average number of citations was 320. Dates of publication ranged from 1953 - 2005. Most papers originated in the United States (n = 67) followed by Italy (n = 20) and France (n = 10). Harvard University (n = 18) and Osped Civile (n = 11) were the most prolific institutions. Ten journals produced all of the top 100 papers with "Radiology" and "AJR" making up the majority. SN Goldberg and T Livraghi were the most prolific authors. Nearly two thirds of the papers (n = 61) were published after 1990. This analysis identifies many of the landmark interventional radiology papers and provides a fascinating insight into the changing discourse within the field. It also identifies topics, authors and institutions which have impacted greatly on the specialty.

Automatic identification of high impact articles in PubMed to support clinical decision making.

PubMed

Bian, Jiantao; Morid, Mohammad Amin; Jonnalagadda, Siddhartha; Luo, Gang; Del Fiol, Guilherme

2017-09-01

The practice of evidence-based medicine involves integrating the latest best available evidence into patient care decisions. Yet, critical barriers exist for clinicians' retrieval of evidence that is relevant for a particular patient from primary sources such as randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses. To help address those barriers, we investigated machine learning algorithms that find clinical studies with high clinical impact from PubMed®. Our machine learning algorithms use a variety of features including bibliometric features (e.g., citation count), social media attention, journal impact factors, and citation metadata. The algorithms were developed and evaluated with a gold standard composed of 502 high impact clinical studies that are referenced in 11 clinical evidence-based guidelines on the treatment of various diseases. We tested the following hypotheses: (1) our high impact classifier outperforms a state-of-the-art classifier based on citation metadata and citation terms, and PubMed's® relevance sort algorithm; and (2) the performance of our high impact classifier does not decrease significantly after removing proprietary features such as citation count. The mean top 20 precision of our high impact classifier was 34% versus 11% for the state-of-the-art classifier and 4% for PubMed's® relevance sort (p=0.009); and the performance of our high impact classifier did not decrease significantly after removing proprietary features (mean top 20 precision=34% vs. 36%; p=0.085). The high impact classifier, using features such as bibliometrics, social media attention and MEDLINE® metadata, outperformed previous approaches and is a promising alternative to identifying high impact studies for clinical decision support. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

[The impact factor--a reliable sciento-metric parameter?].

PubMed

Meenen, N M

1997-08-01

With shortage of research funds and increasing competition for medical posts, performance indicators and control instruments are being looked for in order to be able to allot research funds and make professorial appointments in relation to scientific performance. Incomprehensibly for many, the impact factor has become the decisive scientometric indicator at German universities despite of substantial systematic limitations. The impact factor is derived from the journal citation reports. Its basis of calculation entails the following problems: the editorial board of the private Institute of Scientific Information (ISI) decides on whether a journal is to be classified as a source journal. The citation index of all journals is calculated from their citations alone. Crucial means of influencing the impact factor result from self-citations and citation groups in these source journals. Languages other than English and other than Latin alphabets are appreciably disadvantaged by the citation index, which is why for example despite its international significance the rapid development of the osteosynthesis technique in German speaking countries went unnoticed by British and American orthopedic surgeons and scientists. The articles on postgraduate training necessarily published by clinicians in the respective language of their country are not cited because the addresses of such publications do not engage in research. Clinical disciplines (especially highly specialized disciplines such as trauma and hand surgery) thus attain appreciably lower impact factors for their journals than basic disciplines and interdisciplinary clinical sectors which lead the ranking of journals. The period covered in calculating the impact factor is only 2 years. Very modern and widely disseminated organs of publication with a short information halflife are favored. From the 10 objectively most often cited and most important journals for the scientific society, only 2 are to be found amongst those with the highest impact factor. The impact front-runner from 1995 has a very low absolute number of citations. The impact factor provides limited statistical information on a journal in its special field. Using it for this purpose presupposes knowledge of rules, limitations and constraints. Its uncritical use as a general currency of science is fundamentally unscientific. In addition, this leads to the specialists in the field knowledge of the universities being disregarded in favor of a pseudo-objective parameter determined elsewhere. At all events, correction factors for the impact factor have to be applied in respect to the different disciplines. The faculties should reach agreement on relevant (also on German language) organs of publication. The impact factor is not suitable as an indicator of the research activity and the quality of a researcher or an institution. Besides careful human judgement and other classical methods of decision making, the Science Citation Index can contribute to the individual evaluation.

Data Citation Impediments: Human and Institutional Inertia

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Mayernik, M. S.

2013-12-01

Data citations are growing in visibility in scientific and public policy circles. Data citations directly link scholarship and data, and as such provide a mechanism through which data can be discovered and accessed, scholarly use of data can be tracked, and the impact of data facilities can be identified. The interest in data citations is coming from many research stakeholders, including funders, policy makers, professional societies and their publication entities, research organizations, and individual researchers. Most of the efforts to date around data citations have focused on the challenges of assigning unique identifiers to digital data sets. While these challenges are significant, an additional challenge has gone relatively unaddressed, namely, the fact that data citation is not a common practice within scientific communities. This presentation will present findings from an interview study within the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research / National Center for Atmospheric Research (UCAR/NCAR). Through interviews with 14 scientists and engineers, we have found that there is little evidence that data citations have gained momentum as a common practice. Currently, data users acknowledge their use of particular data sets in either the research methods or acknowledgements sections of their papers, not as formal citations in a paper's bibliography. Data users are often 1) unaware that they can and should cite data sets, 2) unsure of how to cite data sets, and 3) lacking career motivations to forward data citations as a common activity. Data citation initiatives will have minimal impact on the scientific community if they do not address this practical inertia. Data users are a critical stakeholder in the data citation process. Their voice needs to be central to the data citation discussion. We will discuss how outreach efforts need to focus on raising the profile of data citations by informing scientists and administrators, being proactive in providing data users with recommended citations, and embedding data citations within larger scientific research institutions like academic tenure and scholarly peer review.

A proposal for a novel impact factor as an alternative to the JCR impact factor

PubMed Central

Yang, Zu-Guo; Zhang, Chun-Ting

2013-01-01

One disadvantage of the JCR impact factor, the most commonly used assessment tool for ranking and evaluating scientific journals, is its inability in distinguishing among different shapes of citation distribution curves, leading to unfair evaluation of journals in some cases. This paper aims to put forward an alternative impact factor (IF′) that can properly reflect citation distributions. The two impact factors are linearly and positively correlated, and have roughly the same order of magnitude. Because of the ability of IF′ in distinguishing among different shapes of citation distribution curves, IF′ may properly reflect the academic performance of a scientific journal in a way that is different from the JCR impact factor with some unique features that reward journals with highly cited papers. Therefore, it is suggested that IF′ could be used to complement the JCR impact factor. PMID:24296521

A proposal for a novel impact factor as an alternative to the JCR impact factor.

PubMed

Yang, Zu-Guo; Zhang, Chun-Ting

2013-12-03

One disadvantage of the JCR impact factor, the most commonly used assessment tool for ranking and evaluating scientific journals, is its inability in distinguishing among different shapes of citation distribution curves, leading to unfair evaluation of journals in some cases. This paper aims to put forward an alternative impact factor (IF') that can properly reflect citation distributions. The two impact factors are linearly and positively correlated, and have roughly the same order of magnitude. Because of the ability of IF' in distinguishing among different shapes of citation distribution curves, IF' may properly reflect the academic performance of a scientific journal in a way that is different from the JCR impact factor with some unique features that reward journals with highly cited papers. Therefore, it is suggested that IF' could be used to complement the JCR impact factor.

Using Google Scholar Citations to Support the Impact of Scholarly Work

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Pitney, William A.; Gilson, Todd A.

2012-01-01

Athletic training faculty seeking tenure and promotion, or simply undergoing an annual merit review, may need an understanding of the impact of their scholarly work. To that end, citation counts are frequently used as a measure of impact that a journal article has had in a given discipline. As compared to the simple quantity of publications, the…

[Bibliographic survey of the Orvosi Hetilap of Hungary: looking back and moving forward].

PubMed

Berhidi, Anna; Margittai, Zsuzsa; Vasas, Lívia

2012-12-02

The first step in the process of acquisition of impact factor for a scientific journal is to get registered at Thomson Reuters Web of Science database. The aim of this article is to evaluate the content and structure of Orvosi Hetilap with regards to selection criteria of Thomson Reuters, in particular to objectives of citation analysis. Authors evaluated issues of Orvosi Hetilap published in 2011 and calculated the unofficial impact factor of the journal based on systematic search in various citation index databases. Number of citations, quality of citing journals and scientific output of the editorial board members were evaluated. Adherence to guidelines of international publishers was assessed, as well. Unofficial impact factor of Orvosi Hetilap has been continuously rising every year in the past decade (except for 2004 and 2010). The articles of Orvosi Hetilap are widely cited by international authors and high impact factor journals, too. Further, more than half the articles cited are open access. The most frequently cited categories are original and review articles as well as clinical studies. Orvosi Hetilap is a weekly published journal, which is covered by many international databases such as PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, and BIOSIS Previews. As regards to the scientific output of the editorial board members, the truncated mean of the number of their publications was 497, citations 2446, independent citations 2014 and h-index 21. While Orvosi Hetilap fulfils many criteria for getting covered by Thomson Reuters, it is worthwhile to implement a method of online citation system in order to increase the number of citations. In addition, scientific publications of all editorial board members should be made easily accessible. Finally, publications of comparative studies by multiple authors are encouraged as well as papers containing epidemiological data analyses.

Does Interdisciplinary Research Lead to Higher Citation Impact? The Different Effect of Proximal and Distal Interdisciplinarity

PubMed Central

Yegros-Yegros, Alfredo; Rafols, Ismael; D’Este, Pablo

2015-01-01

This article analyses the effect of degree of interdisciplinarity on the citation impact of individual publications for four different scientific fields. We operationalise interdisciplinarity as disciplinary diversity in the references of a publication, and rather than treating interdisciplinarity as a monodimensional property, we investigate the separate effect of different aspects of diversity on citation impact: i.e. variety, balance and disparity. We use a Tobit regression model to examine the effect of these properties of interdisciplinarity on citation impact, controlling for a range of variables associated with the characteristics of publications. We find that variety has a positive effect on impact, whereas balance and disparity have a negative effect. Our results further qualify the separate effect of these three aspects of diversity by pointing out that all three dimensions of interdisciplinarity display a curvilinear (inverted U-shape) relationship with citation impact. These findings can be interpreted in two different ways. On the one hand, they are consistent with the view that, while combining multiple fields has a positive effect in knowledge creation, successful research is better achieved through research efforts that draw on a relatively proximal range of fields, as distal interdisciplinary research might be too risky and more likely to fail. On the other hand, these results may be interpreted as suggesting that scientific audiences are reluctant to cite heterodox papers that mix highly disparate bodies of knowledge—thus giving less credit to publications that are too groundbreaking or challenging. PMID:26266805

Does Interdisciplinary Research Lead to Higher Citation Impact? The Different Effect of Proximal and Distal Interdisciplinarity.

PubMed

Yegros-Yegros, Alfredo; Rafols, Ismael; D'Este, Pablo

2015-01-01

This article analyses the effect of degree of interdisciplinarity on the citation impact of individual publications for four different scientific fields. We operationalise interdisciplinarity as disciplinary diversity in the references of a publication, and rather than treating interdisciplinarity as a monodimensional property, we investigate the separate effect of different aspects of diversity on citation impact: i.e. variety, balance and disparity. We use a Tobit regression model to examine the effect of these properties of interdisciplinarity on citation impact, controlling for a range of variables associated with the characteristics of publications. We find that variety has a positive effect on impact, whereas balance and disparity have a negative effect. Our results further qualify the separate effect of these three aspects of diversity by pointing out that all three dimensions of interdisciplinarity display a curvilinear (inverted U-shape) relationship with citation impact. These findings can be interpreted in two different ways. On the one hand, they are consistent with the view that, while combining multiple fields has a positive effect in knowledge creation, successful research is better achieved through research efforts that draw on a relatively proximal range of fields, as distal interdisciplinary research might be too risky and more likely to fail. On the other hand, these results may be interpreted as suggesting that scientific audiences are reluctant to cite heterodox papers that mix highly disparate bodies of knowledge--thus giving less credit to publications that are too groundbreaking or challenging.

Developing a guideline to standardize the citation of bioresources in journal articles (CoBRA).

PubMed

Bravo, Elena; Calzolari, Alessia; De Castro, Paola; Mabile, Laurence; Napolitani, Federica; Rossi, Anna Maria; Cambon-Thomsen, Anne

2015-02-17

Many biomedical publications refer to data obtained from collections of biosamples. Sharing such bioresources (biological samples, data, and databases) is paramount for the present governance of research. Recognition of the effort involved in generating, maintaining, and sharing high quality bioresources is poorly organized, which does not encourage sharing. At publication level, the recognition of such resources is often neglected and/or highly heterogeneous. This is a true handicap for the traceability of bioresource use. The aim of this article is to propose, for the first time, a guideline for reporting bioresource use in research articles, named CoBRA: Citation of BioResources in journal Articles. As standards for citing bioresources are still lacking, the members of the journal editors subgroup of the Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF) initiative developed a standardized and appropriate citation scheme for such resources by informing stakeholders about the subject and raising awareness among scientists and in science editors' networks, mapping this topic among other relevant initiatives, promoting actions addressed to stakeholders, launching surveys, and organizing focused workshops. The European Association of Science Editors has adopted BRIF's suggestion to incorporate statements on biobanks in the Methods section of their guidelines. The BRIF subgroup agreed upon a proposed citation system: each individual bioresource that is used to perform a study and that is mentioned in the Methods section should be cited as an individual "reference [BIORESOURCE]" according to a delineated format. The EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) network mentioned the proposed reporting guideline in their "guidelines under development" section. Evaluating bioresources' use and impact requires that publications accurately cite such resources. Adopting the standard citation scheme described here will improve the quality of bioresource reporting and will allow their traceability in scientific publications, thus increasing the recognition of bioresources' value and relevance to research. Please see related article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0284-9.

Making your code citable with the Astrophysics Source Code Library

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Allen, Alice; DuPrie, Kimberly; Schmidt, Judy; Berriman, G. Bruce; Hanisch, Robert J.; Mink, Jessica D.; Nemiroff, Robert J.; Shamir, Lior; Shortridge, Keith; Taylor, Mark B.; Teuben, Peter J.; Wallin, John F.

2016-01-01

The Astrophysics Source Code Library (ASCL, ascl.net) is a free online registry of codes used in astronomy research. With nearly 1,200 codes, it is the largest indexed resource for astronomy codes in existence. Established in 1999, it offers software authors a path to citation of their research codes even without publication of a paper describing the software, and offers scientists a way to find codes used in refereed publications, thus improving the transparency of the research. It also provides a method to quantify the impact of source codes in a fashion similar to the science metrics of journal articles. Citations using ASCL IDs are accepted by major astronomy journals and if formatted properly are tracked by ADS and other indexing services. The number of citations to ASCL entries increased sharply from 110 citations in January 2014 to 456 citations in September 2015. The percentage of code entries in ASCL that were cited at least once rose from 7.5% in January 2014 to 17.4% in September 2015. The ASCL's mid-2014 infrastructure upgrade added an easy entry submission form, more flexible browsing, search capabilities, and an RSS feeder for updates. A Changes/Additions form added this past fall lets authors submit links for papers that use their codes for addition to the ASCL entry even if those papers don't formally cite the codes, thus increasing the transparency of that research and capturing the value of their software to the community.

Interdisciplinarity and Impact: Distinct Effects of Variety, Balance, and Disparity

PubMed Central

Wang, Jian; Thijs, Bart; Glänzel, Wolfgang

2015-01-01

Interdisciplinary research is increasingly recognized as the solution to today’s challenging scientific and societal problems, but the relationship between interdisciplinary research and scientific impact is still unclear. This paper studies the association between the degree of interdisciplinarity and the number of citations at the paper level. Different from previous studies compositing various aspects of interdisciplinarity into a single indicator, we use factor analysis to uncover distinct dimensions of interdisciplinarity corresponding to variety, balance, and disparity. We estimate Poisson models with journal fixed effects and robust standard errors to analyze the divergent relationships between these three factors and citations. We find that long-term (13-year) citations (1) increase at an increasing rate with variety, (2) decrease with balance, and (3) increase at a decreasing rate with disparity. Furthermore, interdisciplinarity also affects the process of citation accumulation: (1) although variety and disparity have positive effects on long-term citations, they have negative effects on short-term (3-year) citations, and (2) although balance has a negative effect on long-term citations, its negative effect is insignificant in the short run. These findings have important implications for interdisciplinary research and science policy. PMID:26001108

What Effect Does Self-Citation Have on Bibliometric Measures in Academic Plastic Surgery?

PubMed

Swanson, Edward W; Miller, Devin T; Susarla, Srinivas M; Lopez, Joseph; Lough, Denver M; May, James W; Redett, Richard J

2016-09-01

Research productivity plays a significant role in academic promotions. Currently, various bibliometric measures utilizing citation counts are used to judge an author's work. With increasing numbers of journals, numbers of open access publications, ease of online submission, and expedited indexing of accepted manuscripts, it is plausible that an author could influence his/her own bibliometric measures through self-citation. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of self-citation in academic plastic surgery. A cohort of full-time academic plastic surgeons was identified from 9 U.S. plastic surgery training programs. For all included faculty, academic rank was retrieved from department/division websites, and bibliometric measures were assessed using a subscription bibliographic citation database (Scopus, Reed Elsevier, London, UK). Bibliometric measures included the Hirsch index (h-index, the number of publications h which are cited ≥ h times), total number of publications, and total number of citations. The h-index and total number of citations were collected with and without self-citations. Percent changes in the h-index and total citations were calculated after removal of self-citations and compared across academic ranks and levels of research productivity (total publications, h-index, and total citations). The study cohort consisted of 169 full-time academic plastic surgeons. The h-index and total citations experienced decreases of 2.8 ± 5.0% (P < 0.0001) and 4.5 ± 4.6% (P < 0.0001), respectively, after correction for self-citation. More than half of the cohort (n = 113, 67%) did not experience a change in the h-index after removal of self-citations. These decreases did not vary across academic rank. Surgeons who self-cited at rates greater than 5% were 9.8 times more likely (95% confidence interval, 4.5-21.9; P < 0.001) to have their h-index change as a result of self-citation (after adjusting for academic rank). There were weak correlations between percent decreases in the h-index and total citations and various biblimoteric measures (total publications, h-index, total citations; r < 0.32). Self-citation has a minor impact on common bibliometric measures in academic plastic surgery. The influence of self-citation is consistent across academic ranks and increasing levels of bibliometric measures, suggesting that authors are not manipulating the system with increasing experience.

The impact factor of a journal is a poor measure of the clinical relevance of its papers.

PubMed

Kodumuri, P; Ollivere, B; Holley, J; Moran, C G

2014-03-01

We evaluated the top 13 journals in trauma and orthopaedics by impact factor and looked at the longer-term effect regarding citations of their papers. All 4951 papers published in these journals during 2007 and 2008 were reviewed and categorised by their type, subspecialty and super-specialty. All citations indexed through Google Scholar were reviewed to establish the rate of citation per paper at two, four and five years post-publication. The top five journals published a total of 1986 papers. Only three (0.15%) were on operative orthopaedic surgery and none were on trauma. Most (n = 1084, 54.5%) were about experimental basic science. Surgical papers had a lower rate of citation (2.18) at two years than basic science or clinical medical papers (4.68). However, by four years the rates were similar (26.57 for surgery, 30.35 for basic science/medical), which suggests that there is a considerable time lag before clinical surgical research has an impact. We conclude that high impact journals do not address clinical research in surgery and when they do, there is a delay before such papers are cited. We suggest that a rate of citation at five years post-publication might be a more appropriate indicator of importance for papers in our specialty.

Prestige versus citation volume as journal indices in cognitive neuroscience.

PubMed

Ward, Jamie

2014-01-01

In recent years, alternative measures of a journal's influence have been developed to those based on citation metrics (such as Impact Factor). This includes the Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) which is adapted from algorithms used to prioritize webpages in search engines. It is considered a measure of "prestige" insofar as it takes into account the importance of links/citations and not just their total number. Taking a sample of 38 journals from within the field of cognitive neuroscience, it is shown that SJR and Impact Factor correlate highly (r = .83) but with a few large discrepancies in rankings. This journal, Cognitive Neuroscience, fares better on the prestige-based measure than might otherwise be expected from its citation-based rank.

Visualizing Energy on Target: Molecular Dynamics Simulations

DTIC Science & Technology

2017-12-01

to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. Citation of manufacturer’s or...tend to be small, whereas corresponding coefficients for molecules with low-frequency vibrations close to the impact surface are comparatively much...This is due to the reduced number of N2 collisions with the target resulting from this comparatively weak value of vimp. Figures 10–12 are

Percentile Ranking and Citation Impact of a Large Cohort of NHLBI-funded Cardiovascular R01 Grants

PubMed Central

Danthi, Narasimhan; Wu, Colin O.; Shi, Peibei; Lauer, Michael

2014-01-01

Rationale Funding decisions for cardiovascular R01 grant applications at NHLBI largely hinge on percentile rankings. It is not known whether this approach enables the highest impact science. Objective To conduct an observational analysis of percentile rankings and bibliometric outcomes for a contemporary set of funded NHLBI cardiovascular R01 grants. Methods and results We identified 1492 investigator-initiated de novo R01 grant applications that were funded between 2001 and 2008, and followed their progress for linked publications and citations to those publications. Our co-primary endpoints were citations received per million dollars of funding, citations obtained within 2-years of publication, and 2-year citations for each grant’s maximally cited paper. In 7654 grant-years of funding that generated $3004 million of total NIH awards, the portfolio yielded 16,793 publications that appeared between 2001 and 2012 (median per grant 8, 25th and 75th percentiles 4 and 14, range 0 – 123), which received 2,224,255 citations (median per grant 1048, 25th and 75th percentiles 492 and 1,932, range 0 – 16,295). We found no association between percentile ranking and citation metrics; the absence of association persisted even after accounting for calendar time, grant duration, number of grants acknowledged per paper, number of authors per paper, early investigator status, human versus non-human focus, and institutional funding. An exploratory machine-learning analysis suggested that grants with the very best percentile rankings did yield more maximally cited papers. Conclusions In a large cohort of NHLBI-funded cardiovascular R01 grants, we were unable to find a monotonic association between better percentile ranking and higher scientific impact as assessed by citation metrics. PMID:24406983

Percentile ranking and citation impact of a large cohort of National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-funded cardiovascular R01 grants.

PubMed

Danthi, Narasimhan; Wu, Colin O; Shi, Peibei; Lauer, Michael

2014-02-14

Funding decisions for cardiovascular R01 grant applications at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) largely hinge on percentile rankings. It is not known whether this approach enables the highest impact science. Our aim was to conduct an observational analysis of percentile rankings and bibliometric outcomes for a contemporary set of funded NHLBI cardiovascular R01 grants. We identified 1492 investigator-initiated de novo R01 grant applications that were funded between 2001 and 2008 and followed their progress for linked publications and citations to those publications. Our coprimary end points were citations received per million dollars of funding, citations obtained <2 years of publication, and 2-year citations for each grant's maximally cited paper. In 7654 grant-years of funding that generated $3004 million of total National Institutes of Health awards, the portfolio yielded 16 793 publications that appeared between 2001 and 2012 (median per grant, 8; 25th and 75th percentiles, 4 and 14; range, 0-123), which received 2 224 255 citations (median per grant, 1048; 25th and 75th percentiles, 492 and 1932; range, 0-16 295). We found no association between percentile rankings and citation metrics; the absence of association persisted even after accounting for calendar time, grant duration, number of grants acknowledged per paper, number of authors per paper, early investigator status, human versus nonhuman focus, and institutional funding. An exploratory machine learning analysis suggested that grants with the best percentile rankings did yield more maximally cited papers. In a large cohort of NHLBI-funded cardiovascular R01 grants, we were unable to find a monotonic association between better percentile ranking and higher scientific impact as assessed by citation metrics.

[A scientometric view of Revista Médica de Chile].

PubMed

Krauskopf, Manuel; Krauskopf, Erwin

2008-08-01

During the last decade Revista Médica de Chile increased its visibility, measured on citations and impact factor. To perform a scientometric analysis to assess the performance of Revista Médica de Chile. Thomson's-ISI Web of Science and Journal Citation Reports QCR) were consulted for performance indicators of Revista Médica de Chile and Latin American journals whose subject is General and Internal Medicine. We also report the h-index of the journal, which infers quality linked to the quantity of the output. According to the h-index, Revista Médica de Chile ranks 4 among the 36 journals indexed and published by Argentina, Brazil, Chile and México. The top ten articles published by Revista Médica de Chile and the institutions with the higher contribution to the journal, were identified using citations. In the Latin American region, Brazil relevantly increased its scientific output. However, Argentina, Chile and México maintain a plateau during the last decade. Revista Médica de Chile increased notoriously its performance. Its contribution to the Chilean scientific community dedicated to Medicine appears to be of central value.

Analysis of the citation of articles published in the European Journal of Emergency Medicine since its foundation.

PubMed

Fernández-Guerrero, Inés M; Martín-Sánchez, Francisco J; Burillo-Putze, Guillermo; Graham, Collin A; Miró, Òscar

2017-10-09

The aim of this study was to evaluate the evolution of the citation of articles from the European Journal of Emergency Medicine (EJEM) from 1994 (EJEM foundation) to 2015 and identify highly cited articles and their principal characteristics and determine a possible correlation between the citations counted in different databases. We obtained the articles published in EJEM from 1994 to 2015 in ISI-WoS (main source) and Scopus, Google Scholar, and Medline databases (accessory sources). The citations were quantified and their annual evolution and the bibliometric indices derived (impact factor and SCImago Journal Rank) were evaluated. We identified and analyzed the highly cited EJEM articles and evaluated the possible correlation between the citations counted for these articles in the databases. Overall, 1705 EJEM articles were cited 9422 times in 8122 different articles. The evolution of the global citation, impact factor, and SCImago Journal Rank from 1994 to 2015 increased significantly. The h-index of EJEM was 30, and 31 articles were considered highly cited (≥30 citations), 16.1% of them being clinical trials. By subjects, 22.5% corresponded to cardiology, 19.3% to emergency department management, and 12.9% to pediatrics; by countries, 81% were from Europe, with Belgian authors publishing four (12.9%) highly cited articles, and French, Spanish, British, and Swedish authors having three (9.7%) each. Two studies in the EJEM achieved the definition of 'citation classics' (more than 100 citations). The number of citations in all the databases, except Medline, showed statistically significant correlations. Citation of EJEM articles has progressively increased and EJEM bibliometric indicators have improved; most highly cited articles are mainly by European authors.

A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures

PubMed Central

Bollen, Johan; Van de Sompel, Herbert

2009-01-01

Background The impact of scientific publications has traditionally been expressed in terms of citation counts. However, scientific activity has moved online over the past decade. To better capture scientific impact in the digital era, a variety of new impact measures has been proposed on the basis of social network analysis and usage log data. Here we investigate how these new measures relate to each other, and how accurately and completely they express scientific impact. Methodology We performed a principal component analysis of the rankings produced by 39 existing and proposed measures of scholarly impact that were calculated on the basis of both citation and usage log data. Conclusions Our results indicate that the notion of scientific impact is a multi-dimensional construct that can not be adequately measured by any single indicator, although some measures are more suitable than others. The commonly used citation Impact Factor is not positioned at the core of this construct, but at its periphery, and should thus be used with caution. PMID:19562078

Self- and cross-citations in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis and the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior: 1993-2003.

PubMed

Elliott, Amy J; Morgan, Kineta; Fuqua, R Wayne; Ehrhardt, Kristal; Poling, Alan

2005-01-01

Self- and cross-citations in JABA and JEAB from 1993 through 2003 were examined. Yearly mean levels of self-citation for JABA and JEAB were 34.9% and 33.2%, respectively. Overall, 7.8% of JABA citations were JEAB articles, and 0.6% of JEAB citations were JABA articles. The former value, but not the latter, is substantially higher than the cross-citation level reported for earlier years. The two JEAB articles most often cited in JABA were published over 20 years ago and are concerned with establishing operations and the matching law.

Self- and Cross-Citations in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis and the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior: 1993–2003

PubMed Central

2005-01-01

Self- and cross-citations in JABA and JEAB from 1993 through 2003 were examined. Yearly mean levels of self-citation for JABA and JEAB were 34.9% and 33.2%, respectively. Overall, 7.8% of JABA citations were JEAB articles, and 0.6% of JEAB citations were JABA articles. The former value, but not the latter, is substantially higher than the cross-citation level reported for earlier years. The two JEAB articles most often cited in JABA were published over 20 years ago and are concerned with establishing operations and the matching law. PMID:16463538

100 classic papers of interventional radiology: A citation analysis

PubMed Central

Crockett, Matthew T; Browne, Ronan FJ; MacMahon, Peter J; Lawler, Leo

2015-01-01

AIM: To define the 100 citation classic papers of interventional radiology. METHODS: Using the database of Journal Citation Reports the 40 highest impact factor radiology journals were chosen. From these journals the 100 most cited interventional radiology papers were chosen and analysed. RESULTS: The top paper received 2497 citations and the 100th paper 200 citations. The average number of citations was 320. Dates of publication ranged from 1953 - 2005. Most papers originated in the United States (n = 67) followed by Italy (n = 20) and France (n = 10). Harvard University (n = 18) and Osped Civile (n = 11) were the most prolific institutions. Ten journals produced all of the top 100 papers with “Radiology” and “AJR” making up the majority. SN Goldberg and T Livraghi were the most prolific authors. Nearly two thirds of the papers (n = 61) were published after 1990. CONCLUSION: This analysis identifies many of the landmark interventional radiology papers and provides a fascinating insight into the changing discourse within the field. It also identifies topics, authors and institutions which have impacted greatly on the specialty. PMID:25918585

Impact of the Journal of Child Neurology: 2002 data.

PubMed

Brumback, Roger A

2003-11-01

The Journal of Child Neurology (JCN) began in 1986 as a quarterly publication focused on child neurology and the related clinical pediatric neuroscience areas of pediatric neurosurgery, child psychiatry, pediatric neuroradiology, and developmental and behavioral pediatrics. As submitted material increased, JCN expanded in publication frequency and now appears monthly. Article quality has always been high and many articles have been frequently cited. Over the years, the ratings produced for the ISI Journal Citation Reports have identified JCN as a high-ranking pediatric journal based upon the impact factor value. Currently (year 2002 figures), JCN (with its impact factor of 1.338) ranks 24th out of 68 pediatric journals.

Top 100 Cited Articles on Back Pain Research: A Citation Analysis.

PubMed

Huang, Weimin; Wang, Lei; Wang, Bing; Yu, Lili; Yu, Xiuchun

2016-11-01

A bibliometric review of the literature. Back pain is a global burden that leads people to seek medical service and results in work disability. Numerous studies are published annually to give new insights into back pain. However, characteristics of the high-impact articles on back pain have not been explored. The current study aimed to identify the 100 most cited articles on back pain and determine their characteristics. Back pain is a globally leading cause of work disability. Numerous studies have been published annually to give new insight to back pain. However, comprehensive analysis to identify the most influential articles is not available until now. The Web of Science core database was searched using the subject terms "back NEAR pain," "dorsalgia," "backache," "lumbar NEAR pain," "lumbago," "back NEAR disorder*," "discitis." The searching results were listed by citation times and the top 100 cited articles on back pain were identified. Important information such as author, journal, publishing year, country, institution, and study type were elicited. A total of 44,460 articles on back pain were displayed. Citation times of the enrolled 100 articles ranged from 249 to 1638 with a mean value of 418. The most productive periods were 1991 to 1995 and 1996 to 2000. The journal Spine holds the largest number of 45 articles, followed by Pain with seven articles. A total of 11 countries contribute to the 100 articles and the United States topped the list. None of the high-impact articles were produced in Asian and African. The current citation analysis demonstrated the essential advances in the history of back pain research and determined the influential authors, institutions, countries, and journals that had outstanding contributions to the studies of back pain. 3.

How is impact factor impacting our research?

PubMed

Rawat, Seema

2014-01-01

The impact factor (IF) of an journal is a measure reflecting the average number of citations to recent articles published in the journal. It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field, with journals with higher impact factors deemed to be more important than those with lower ones. However it is not a perfect metric and has its own limitations. Journals are increasingly finding new ways to improve their impact factor by increasing self citation, publishing more review articles. This correspondence discuss the fallacies of the impact factor.

Bridging knowledge translation gap in health in developing countries: visibility, impact and publishing standards in journals from the Eastern Mediterranean

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background Local and regional scientific journals are important factors in bridging gaps in health knowledge translation in low-and middle-income countries. We assessed indexing, citations and publishing standards of journals from the Eastern Mediterranean region. Methods For journals from 22 countries in the collection of the Index Medicus for the Eastern Mediterranean Region (IMEMR), we analyzed indexing in bibliographical databases and citations during 2006–2009 to published items in 2006 in Web of Science (WoS) and SCOPUS. Adherence to editorial and publishing standards was assessed using a special checklist. Results Out of 419 journals in IMEMR, 19 were indexed in MEDLINE, 23 in WoS and 46 in SCOPUS. Their impact factors ranged from 0.016 to 1.417. For a subset of 175 journals with available tables of contents from 2006, articles published in 2006 from 93 journals received 2068 citations in SCOPUS (23.5% self-citations) and articles in 86 journals received 1579 citations in WoS (24.3% self-citations) during 2006–2009. Citations to articles came mostly from outside of the Eastern Mediterranean region (76.8% in WoS and 75.4% in SCOPUS). Articles receiving highest number of citations presented topics specific for the region. Many journals did not follow editorial and publishing standards, such addressing requirements about the patient’s privacy rights (68.0% out of 244 analyzed), policy on managing conflicts of interest (66.4%), and ethical conduct in clinical and animal research (66.4%). Conclusion Journals from the Eastern Mediterranean are visible in and have impact on global scientific community. Coordinated effort of all stakeholders in journal publishing, including researchers, journal editors and owners, policy makers and citation databases, is needed to further promote local journals as windows to the research in the developing world and the doors for valuable regional research to the global scientific community. PMID:22577965

Bridging knowledge translation gap in health in developing countries: visibility, impact and publishing standards in journals from the Eastern Mediterranean.

PubMed

Utrobičić, Ana; Chaudhry, Nauman; Ghaffar, Abdul; Marušić, Ana

2012-05-11

Local and regional scientific journals are important factors in bridging gaps in health knowledge translation in low-and middle-income countries. We assessed indexing, citations and publishing standards of journals from the Eastern Mediterranean region. For journals from 22 countries in the collection of the Index Medicus for the Eastern Mediterranean Region (IMEMR), we analyzed indexing in bibliographical databases and citations during 2006-2009 to published items in 2006 in Web of Science (WoS) and SCOPUS. Adherence to editorial and publishing standards was assessed using a special checklist. Out of 419 journals in IMEMR, 19 were indexed in MEDLINE, 23 in WoS and 46 in SCOPUS. Their impact factors ranged from 0.016 to 1.417. For a subset of 175 journals with available tables of contents from 2006, articles published in 2006 from 93 journals received 2068 citations in SCOPUS (23.5% self-citations) and articles in 86 journals received 1579 citations in WoS (24.3% self-citations) during 2006-2009. Citations to articles came mostly from outside of the Eastern Mediterranean region (76.8% in WoS and 75.4% in SCOPUS). Articles receiving highest number of citations presented topics specific for the region. Many journals did not follow editorial and publishing standards, such addressing requirements about the patient's privacy rights (68.0% out of 244 analyzed), policy on managing conflicts of interest (66.4%), and ethical conduct in clinical and animal research (66.4%). Journals from the Eastern Mediterranean are visible in and have impact on global scientific community. Coordinated effort of all stakeholders in journal publishing, including researchers, journal editors and owners, policy makers and citation databases, is needed to further promote local journals as windows to the research in the developing world and the doors for valuable regional research to the global scientific community.

Measuring Research Quality Using the Journal Impact Factor, Citations and "Ranked Journals": Blunt Instruments or Inspired Metrics?

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Jarwal, Som D.; Brion, Andrew M.; King, Maxwell L.

2009-01-01

This paper examines whether three bibliometric indicators--the journal impact factor, citations per paper and the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) initiative's list of "ranked journals"--can predict the quality of individual research articles as assessed by international experts, both overall and within broad disciplinary…

Highly cited German research contributions to the fields of radiation oncology, biology, and physics: focus on collaboration and diversity.

PubMed

Nieder, C

2012-10-01

Tight budgets and increasing competition for research funding pose challenges for highly specialized medical disciplines such as radiation oncology. Therefore, a systematic review was performed of successfully completed research that had a high impact on clinical practice. These data might be helpful when preparing new projects. Different measures of impact, visibility, and quality of published research are available, each with its own pros and cons. For this study, the article citation rate was chosen (minimum 15 citations per year on average). Highly cited German contributions to the fields of radiation oncology, biology, and physics (published between 1990 and 2010) were identified from the Scopus database. Between 1990 and 2010, 106 articles published in 44 scientific journals met the citation requirement. The median average of yearly citations was 21 (maximum 167, minimum 15). All articles with ≥ 40 citations per year were published between 2003 and 2009, consistent with the assumption that the citation rate gradually increases for up to 2 years after publication. Most citations per year were recorded for meta-analyses and randomized phase III trials, which typically were performed by collaborative groups. A large variety of clinical radiotherapy, biology, and physics topics achieved high numbers of citations. However, areas such as quality of life and side effects, palliative radiotherapy, and radiotherapy for nonmalignant disorders were underrepresented. Efforts to increase their visibility might be warranted.

Citation classics in nursing journals: the top 50 most frequently cited articles from 1956 to 2011.

PubMed

Wong, Eliza L Y; Tam, Wilson W S; Wong, Faye C Y; Cheung, Annie W L

2013-01-01

Assessing the impact of individual journal articles provides information for understanding trends in science and translation of findings on practice. Citation analysis is an important way to highlight the contributions of individual author/investigator and journals on nursing practice. The purpose of this study was to identify the most frequently cited articles published in nursing journals from 1956 to 2011. The Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index were searched for citations through 2011 to articles published in the 89 nursing journals listed on the Journal Citation Reports (2010 edition). The number of citations, topic, countries, and institutions of origin based on the first author affiliation, year of publication, study design, publishing journal, journal country, and journal impact factor were noted. The most frequently cited articles published in the 89 nursing journals from 1956 to 2011 were identified. The top 50 most frequently cited articles were published in 10 nursing journals between 1970 and 2005. The top cited article received 784 citations. The most common topics were methodology for qualitative studies, validation procedures for tool development, and nursing care and practices in cancer and mental health. The most common study designs were reviews including meta-analysis and instrument validation. Most of the top 50 cited articles were published from 1986 to 1995. The findings provide insights into priorities and trends in nursing research and translational science.

Revisiting an open access monograph experiment: measuring citations and tweets 5 years later.

PubMed

Snijder, Ronald

An experiment run in 2009 could not assess whether making monographs available in open access enhanced scholarly impact. This paper revisits the experiment, drawing on additional citation data and tweets. It attempts to answer the following research question: does open access have a positive influence on the number of citations and tweets a monograph receives, taking into account the influence of scholarly field and language? The correlation between monograph citations and tweets is also investigated. The number of citations and tweets measured in 2014 reveal a slight open access advantage, but the influence of language or subject should also be taken into account. However, Twitter usage and citation behaviour hardly overlap.

The Citation Index of Chemistry Education Research in the "Journal of Chemical Education" from 2008 to 2016: A Closer Look at the Impact Factor

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Rodriguez, Jon-Marc G.; Bain, Kinsey; Moon, Alena; Mack, Michael R.; DeKorver, Brittland K.; Towns, Marcy H.

2017-01-01

Journal impact factors are a metric often used to evaluate journals; they are calculated by considering a journal's citation and publication rates during a specified time period. In some cases, impact factors can be misleading because they do not take into account the publication of different types of papers. In the "Journal of Chemical…

Medical journals, impact and social media: an ecological study of the Twittersphere.

PubMed

Cosco, Theodore D

2015-12-08

Twitter is an increasingly popular means of research dissemination. I sought to examine the relation between scientific merit and mainstream popularity of general medical journals. I extracted impact factors and citations for 2014 for all general medical journals listed in the Thomson Reuters InCites Journal Citation Reports. I collected Twitter statistics (number of followers, number following, number of tweets) between July 25 and 27, 2015 from the Twitter profiles of journals that had Twitter accounts. I calculated the ratio of observed to expected Twitter followers according to citations via the Kardashian Index. I created the (Fifty Shades of) Grey Scale to calculate the analogous ratio according to impact factor. Only 28% (43/153) of journals had Twitter profiles. The scientific and social media impact of journals were correlated: in adjusted models, Twitter followers increased by 0.78% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38%-1.18%) for every 1% increase in impact factor and by 0.62% (95% CI 0.34%-0.90%) for every 1% increase in citations. Kardashian Index scores above the 99% CI were obsverved in 16% (7/43) of journals, including 6 of the 7 highest ranked journals by impact factor, whereas 58% (25/43) had scores below this interval. For the Grey Scale, 12% (5/43) of journals had scores above and 35% (15/43) had scores below the 99% CI. The size of a general medical journal's Twitter following is strongly linked to its impact factor and citations, suggesting that higher quality research received more mainstream attention. Many journals have not capitalized on this dissemination method, although others have used it to their advantage. © 2015 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors.

Medical journals, impact and social media: an ecological study of the Twittersphere

PubMed Central

Cosco, Theodore D.

2015-01-01

Background: Twitter is an increasingly popular means of research dissemination. I sought to examine the relation between scientific merit and mainstream popularity of general medical journals. Methods: I extracted impact factors and citations for 2014 for all general medical journals listed in the Thomson Reuters InCites Journal Citation Reports. I collected Twitter statistics (number of followers, number following, number of tweets) between July 25 and 27, 2015 from the Twitter profiles of journals that had Twitter accounts. I calculated the ratio of observed to expected Twitter followers according to citations via the Kardashian Index. I created the (Fifty Shades of) Grey Scale to calculate the analogous ratio according to impact factor. Results: Only 28% (43/153) of journals had Twitter profiles. The scientific and social media impact of journals were correlated: in adjusted models, Twitter followers increased by 0.78% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38%–1.18%) for every 1% increase in impact factor and by 0.62% (95% CI 0.34%–0.90%) for every 1% increase in citations. Kardashian Index scores above the 99% CI were obsverved in 16% (7/43) of journals, including 6 of the 7 highest ranked journals by impact factor, whereas 58% (25/43) had scores below this interval. For the Grey Scale, 12% (5/43) of journals had scores above and 35% (15/43) had scores below the 99% CI. Interpretation: The size of a general medical journal’s Twitter following is strongly linked to its impact factor and citations, suggesting that higher quality research received more mainstream attention. Many journals have not capitalized on this dissemination method, although others have used it to their advantage. PMID:26644544

Citation Analysis of Hepatitis Monthly by Journal Citation Report (ISI), Google Scholar, and Scopus.

PubMed

Miri, Seyyed Mohammad; Raoofi, Azam; Heidari, Zahra

2012-09-01

Citation analysis as one of the most widely used methods of bibliometrics can be used for computing the various impact measures for scholars based on data from citation databases. Journal Citation Reports (JCR) from Thomson Reuters provides annual report in the form of impact factor (IF) for each journal. We aimed to evaluate the citation parameters of Hepatitis Monthly by JCR in 2010 and compare them with GS and Sc. All articles of Hepat Mon published in 2009 and 2008 which had been cited in 2010 in three databases including WoS, Sc and GS gathered in a spreadsheet. The IFs were manually calculated. Among the 104 total published articles the accuracy rates of GS and Sc in recording the total number of articles was 96% and 87.5%. There was a difference between IFs among the three databases (0.793 in ISI [Institute for Scientific Information], 0.945 in Sc and 0.85 GS). The missing rate of citations in ISI was 4% totally. Original articles were the main cited types, whereas, guidelines and clinical challenges were the least ones. None of the three databases succeed to record all articles published in the journal. Despite high sensitivity of GS comparing to Sc, it cannot be a reliable source for indexing since GS has lack of screening in the data collection and low specificity. Using an average of three IFs is suggested to find the correct IF. Editors should be more aware on the role of original articles in increasing IF and the potential efficacy of review articles in long term impact factor.

Impact of Voluntary Accreditation on Deficiency Citations in U.S. Nursing Homes

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wagner, Laura M.; McDonald, Shawna M.; Castle, Nicholas G.

2012-01-01

Purpose of the Study: This study examines the association between nursing home accreditation and deficiency citations. Design and Methods: Data originated from a web-based search of The Joint Commission (TJC) accreditation and On-line Survey Certification of Automated Records from 2002 to 2010. Deficiency citations were divided into 4 categories:…

Journal Impact Factors and Self-Citations: Implications for Psychology Journals

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Anseel, Frederik; Duyck, Wouter; De Baene, Wouter; Brysbaert, Marc

2004-01-01

Comments on the study by J. G. Adair and N. Vohra (see record 2003-02034-002) of changes in the number of references and citations in psychology journals as a consequence of the current knowledge explosion. They made a striking observation of the sometimes excessive number of self-citations in psychology journals. However, after this illustration,…

Self-citation rate and impact factor in the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery.

PubMed

Miyamoto, Shimpei

2018-02-01

Journal ranking based on the impact factor (IF) can be distorted by self-citation. The aim of this study is to investigate the present status of self-citation in the plastic surgery journals and its effect on the journals' IFs. IF, IF without self-citations (corrected IF), self-cited rate, and self-citing rate for 11 plastic surgery journals were investigated from 2009-2015, by reviewing the Journal Citation Report ® . The correlations of the IF with the self-cited rate and the self-citing rate were statistically assessed. In addition, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery was compared with 15 top journals from other surgical specialties in 2015. IF was significantly correlated with the self-cited rate (R: 0.594, p = 0.001) and the self-citing rate (R: 0.824, p < 0.001). The self-cited rate of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in 2015 was higher than that of top journals from other surgical specialties. The IFs of Microsurgery and Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery increased greatly in recent years, but they were inflated by high self-cited and self-citing rates. The self-citation rate positively affects the IF in plastic surgery journals. A high concentration of self-citation of some journals could distort the ranking among plastic surgery journals in general.

Food for thought: comparison of citations received from articles appearing in specialized eating disorder journals versus general psychiatry journals.

PubMed

Soh, Nerissa; Walter, Garry; Touyz, Stephen; Russell, Janice; Malhi, Gin S; Hunt, Glenn E

2012-12-01

To conduct a bibliometric analysis of eating disorder journals to guide journal readers and researchers when submitting their manuscripts. Several indices were used to compare journal impact and citations of articles appearing between 1996 and 2010 in six eating disorders journals and six leading general psychiatry journals. The International Journal of Eating Disorders (IJED) had the highest journal impact factor (JIF, 2.278) of the six eating disorders' journals. The general psychiatry journals had higher JIFs and received more citations per eating disorder article than the specialized journals. However, IJED published the highest number of eating disorder articles between 1996 and 2010, and 35 of these articles received at least 100 citations. Using the JIF alone to decide where to submit a manuscript is a poor strategy, as this does not take into consideration the impact an article can have within the eating disorder's field over time. Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

National parks. (Latest citations from the NTIS database). Published Search

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Not Available

The bibliography contains citations concerning U.S. and foreign national parks. Citations discuss terrestrial biology, botany, coastal biology, fire ecology, endangered and exotic species, and resource analysis. Topics also include the impact of park visitors on natural resources in the parks, resource management, planning, and mapping. Information about specific parks including Rocky Mountain, Great Smoky Mountains, Redwood, Grand Canyon, Sequoia, Glacier Bay, and others is presented. (Contains a minimum of 55 citations and includes a subject term index and title list.)

Citation indices for social media articles in urology.

PubMed

Calopedos, Ross J S; Garcia, Cindy; Rashid, Prem; Murphy, Declan G; Lawrentschuk, Nathan; Woo, Henry H

2017-05-01

To evaluate the impact of publications on urological participation in social media (SoMe) by virtue of citations in the urological and non-urological literature. On 15 March 2016, a PubMed search was undertaken using the names of the major SoMe platforms in current use and associated with the field of urology. The search term 'urolog*' was used to specifically capture articles that could be associated with 'urology', 'urologist' or 'urological'. Exclusion criteria for analysis included non-English language articles, articles published for the first time online in any form after 1 March 2015, articles irrelevant to the topic of SoMe, and letters of correspondence. Included articles were then searched in Google Scholar and citations analysed to determine if citations were from the urological literature or non-urological literature. Citations from non-urological journals were considered to be as such even if authored by urologists and on the subject of urology and SoMe. Prior to exclusions as defined in the methods, our PubMed search yielded 232 articles of which 17 were non-English language and 66 had been published after 1 March 2015. Allowing for 12 months after the most recent articles were published, we found that the mean number of total citations in any journal was 20.8. There were more citations in journals not specific to urology, with 8.3 citations in urological journals, compared to 12.6 citations in non-urological journals. Urological SoMe journal articles are highly cited, particularly in the non-urological literature. It is likely that the magnitude of citations has positively contributed to the impact factors of the almost all journals publishing these manuscripts. © 2017 The Authors BJU International © 2017 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Journal impact factors and the influence of age and number of citations

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

The impact factor (IF) of a scientific journal is considered a measure of how important a journal is within its discipline, and it is based on a simple relationship between the number of citations of the journal’s articles divided by the number of articles in the scientific journal (http://en.wikipe...

Assessing the Impact of the Funding Environment on Researchers' Risk Aversion: The Use of Citation Statistics

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Zoller, Frank A.; Zimmerling, Eric; Boutellier, Roman

2014-01-01

The funding environment has a profound impact on researchers' behavior. In particular, it influences their freedom and readiness to conduct research ventures with highly uncertain outcomes. In this conceptual paper, we propose a concise new methodology to evaluate researchers' risk aversion based on citation statistics. The derived…

Theoretical Shifts: Tracing the Transactional Turn in Scholarship on Reading Education

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Martinez-Schaum, Allison

2009-01-01

In the academic world, citations can provide insights into the impact of a particular theoretical orientation on scholarship in a field of study, showing epistemological shifts as numbers of citations to that theory increase or diminish. This study explored the impact of the transactional theory of reading, articulated by Louise Rosenblatt, (e.g.,…

Adding Value to Scholarly Journals through a Citation Indexing System

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Zainab, A. N.; Abrizah, A.; Raj, R. G.

2013-01-01

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to relate the problems identified about scholarly journal publishing in Malaysia to establish motivation for the system development; to describe the design of MyCite, a Malaysian citation indexing system and to highlight the added value to journals and articles indexed through the generation of bibliometrics…

An Audit of Top Citations Published in Pediatric Emergency Care.

PubMed

Waseem, Muhammad; Uffer, Harrison; Josephson, Elaine

2016-05-01

The aim of this study was to identify and compare the 100 articles published in Pediatric Emergency Care (PEC) from its inception in 1985 to date that are most often cited. Three online citation indices, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, were examined to identify the 100 top cited articles from PEC. Mean citation numbers were used to rank the studies, due to differences in the results among the 3 citation indexes. Median citation number, country of origin, study topic within the field of pediatric emergency medicine, and year of publication were compiled, compared, and analyzed. Those articles that had an outcome with the same mean citation number were listed in the table in alphabetical order according to the last name of the primary author of the publication. Mean citation numbers were used to identify the 100 most often cited articles from PEC. The citation counts ranged from a high of 132 to a low of 42 citations, the median being 55. Research for 84 of the 100 articles was conducted in the United States with no other country contributing more than 3 articles each. The top subjects of these articles (and their frequencies) included infectious disease (12), resuscitation (11), anesthesia (10), and toxicology (9). The number 1 ranked article was graduate medical education (GME) related and evaluated resident training/education, with respect to the field of resuscitation. All articles in the top 100 cited were published between 1985 and 2010. The top publication years included 1997, 2000, and 2001, wherein 9 articles were published in each of those 3 years. Of the top 100 articles cited, 78% were published in 1997 and later. In reviewing the literature and to our knowledge, this study is the first of its kind in the field of pediatric emergency medicine to determine the influence of articles in a journal by evaluating citation number. It identified the 100 articles with the highest number of citations that were utilized in subsequent journal articles and published in PEC since 1985. The clinical relevance of identifying the most popular article topics cited supports the value to the pediatric emergency medicine readership of emphasizing subjects of core curriculum content for further education. In addition, reviewing the literature using PEC as a source for articles published 10 to 15 years ago can be helpful because these articles may be considered benchmark articles that many authors choose to cite, creating an impact in their more recent publications.

Measuring the impact of methodological research: a framework and methods to identify evidence of impact.

PubMed

Brueton, Valerie C; Vale, Claire L; Choodari-Oskooei, Babak; Jinks, Rachel; Tierney, Jayne F

2014-11-27

Providing evidence of impact highlights the benefits of medical research to society. Such evidence is increasingly requested by research funders and commonly relies on citation analysis. However, other indicators may be more informative. Although frameworks to demonstrate the impact of clinical research have been reported, no complementary framework exists for methodological research. Therefore, we assessed the impact of methodological research projects conducted or completed between 2009 and 2012 at the UK Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit Hub for Trials Methodology Research Hub, with a view to developing an appropriate framework. Various approaches to the collection of data on research impact were employed. Citation rates were obtained using Web of Science (http://www.webofknowledge.com/) and analyzed descriptively. Semistructured interviews were conducted to obtain information on the rates of different types of research output that indicated impact for each project. Results were then pooled across all projects. Finally, email queries pertaining to methodology projects were collected retrospectively and their content analyzed. Simple citation analysis established the citation rates per year since publication for 74 methodological publications; however, further detailed analysis revealed more about the potential influence of these citations. Interviews that spanned 20 individual research projects demonstrated a variety of types of impact not otherwise collated, for example, applications and further developments of the research; release of software and provision of guidance materials to facilitate uptake; formation of new collaborations and broad dissemination. Finally, 194 email queries relating to 6 methodological projects were received from 170 individuals across 23 countries. They provided further evidence that the methodologies were impacting on research and research practice, both nationally and internationally. We have used the information gathered in this study to adapt an existing framework for impact of clinical research for use in methodological research. Gathering evidence on research impact of methodological research from a variety of sources has enabled us to obtain multiple indicators and thus to demonstrate broad impacts of methodological research. The adapted framework developed can be applied to future methodological research and thus provides a tool for methodologists to better assess and report research impacts.

Growing complex network of citations of scientific papers: Modeling and measurements

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Golosovsky, Michael; Solomon, Sorin

2017-01-01

We consider the network of citations of scientific papers and use a combination of the theoretical and experimental tools to uncover microscopic details of this network growth. Namely, we develop a stochastic model of citation dynamics based on the copying-redirection-triadic closure mechanism. In a complementary and coherent way, the model accounts both for statistics of references of scientific papers and for their citation dynamics. Originating in empirical measurements, the model is cast in such a way that it can be verified quantitatively in every aspect. Such validation is performed by measuring citation dynamics of physics papers. The measurements revealed nonlinear citation dynamics, the nonlinearity being intricately related to network topology. The nonlinearity has far-reaching consequences including nonstationary citation distributions, diverging citation trajectories of similar papers, runaways or "immortal papers" with infinite citation lifetime, etc. Thus nonlinearity in complex network growth is our most important finding. In a more specific context, our results can be a basis for quantitative probabilistic prediction of citation dynamics of individual papers and of the journal impact factor.

The Impact Factor: Implications of Open Access on Quality

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Grozanick, Sara E.

2010-01-01

There has been debate about the extent to which open access affects the quality of scholarly work. At the same time, researchers have begun to look for ways to evaluate the quality of open access publications. Dating back to the growth of citation indexes during the 1960s and 1970s, citation analysis--examining citation statistics--has since been…

Homophily in coauthorship networks of East European sociologists

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hâncean, Marian-Gabriel; Perc, Matjaž

2016-10-01

We study to what degree and how homophily and network properties affect individual citation counts of researchers in the sociology departments of three East European countries, namely Poland, Romania, and Slovenia. We built first-order personal coauthorship networks out of the Web of Science publication records. Each sociologist is assigned as a focal node or ego, while her coauthors are alters. We analyze the data using structural measurements methods, hierarchical regression models, and we make visualizations based on the clustered graph technique. For all three populations, our results indicate that the mean score of the citations of alters substantially predicts the citation counts of egos. In particular, citation similarity increases the chances for coauthorship ties. Evidence for the impact of network properties on the citation levels of egos is mixed. For Poland, normalized ego-betweenness shows a negative effect on citation counts, while network density displays a positive one. For Romania and Slovenia, network characteristics have only a minor impact. Even if the visual summarization of the personal networks uncovers a wide palette of coauthorship patterns, homophily appears to be pervasive. These results are relevant for domestic policy makers who aim to improve the aggregated research performance in East European countries.

The impact of library instruction: do first-year medical students use library resources specifically highlighted during instructional sessions?*

PubMed Central

Rafferty, Ryan S.

2013-01-01

Objectives: The research sought to determine if first-year medical students consulted and cited resources specifically highlighted during library instructional sessions. Methods: Students attended a library resources instructional session. Resources that pertained to the students' assignment were demonstrated and discussed. The students created a report including citations from relevant literature. The citations were analyzed and categorized as: a resource discussed at the instructional session, a resource found on the course LibGuide, a library resource, course material, or some other resource. All citations were subcategorized as print or electronic. Results: Three years (2008–2011) of data analyzing 2,983 citations showed that 49.55% of all citations were from resources discussed during library instructional sessions; 21.86% came from resources with links on the course LibGuide; 77.51% were from library resources; and 90.68% came from electronic resources. Conclusion: Students cited resources specifically highlighted during library instructional sessions for their assignments. The percentage of all citations coming from resources highlighted during the instructional sessions or found on the course LibGuide indicates that library instruction had an impact on the students' work. PMID:23930092

Homophily in coauthorship networks of East European sociologists

PubMed Central

Hâncean, Marian-Gabriel; Perc, Matjaž

2016-01-01

We study to what degree and how homophily and network properties affect individual citation counts of researchers in the sociology departments of three East European countries, namely Poland, Romania, and Slovenia. We built first-order personal coauthorship networks out of the Web of Science publication records. Each sociologist is assigned as a focal node or ego, while her coauthors are alters. We analyze the data using structural measurements methods, hierarchical regression models, and we make visualizations based on the clustered graph technique. For all three populations, our results indicate that the mean score of the citations of alters substantially predicts the citation counts of egos. In particular, citation similarity increases the chances for coauthorship ties. Evidence for the impact of network properties on the citation levels of egos is mixed. For Poland, normalized ego-betweenness shows a negative effect on citation counts, while network density displays a positive one. For Romania and Slovenia, network characteristics have only a minor impact. Even if the visual summarization of the personal networks uncovers a wide palette of coauthorship patterns, homophily appears to be pervasive. These results are relevant for domestic policy makers who aim to improve the aggregated research performance in East European countries. PMID:27786271

Citations to papers from Brazilian institutions: a more effective indicator to assess productivity and the impact of research in graduate programs.

PubMed

Meneghini, R

2011-08-01

A recent assessment of 4400 postgraduate courses in Brazil by CAPES (a federal government agency dedicated to the improvement of the quality of and research at the postgraduate level) stimulated a large amount of manifestations in the press, scientific journals and scientific congresses. This gigantic effort to classify 16,400 scientific journals in order to provide indicators for assessment proved to be puzzling and methodologically erroneous in terms of gauging the institutions from a metric point of view. A simple algorithm is proposed here to weigh the scientometric indicators that should be considered in the assessment of a scientific institution. I conclude here that the simple gauge of the total number of citations accounts for both the productivity of scientists and the impact of articles. The effort spent in this exercise is relatively small, and the sources of information are fully accessible. As an exercise to estimate the value of the methodology, 12 institutions of physics (10 from Brazil, one from the USA and one from Italy) have been evaluated.

Comparison of Journal Self-Citation Rates between Some Chinese and Non-Chinese International Journals

PubMed Central

Yang, Zu-Guo; Gao, Feng; Zhang, Chun-Ting

2012-01-01

Background The past 3 decades have witnessed a boost in science development in China; in parallel, more and more Chinese scientific journals are indexed by the Journal Citation Reports issued by Thomson Reuters (SCI). Evaluation of the performance of these Chinese SCI journals is necessary and helpful to improve their quality. This study aimed to evaluate these journals by calculating various journal self-citation rates, which are important parameters influencing a journal impact factor. Methodology/Principal Findings We defined three journal self-citation rates, and studied these rates for 99 Chinese scientific journals, almost exhausting all Chinese SCI journals currently available. Likewise, we selected 99 non-Chinese international (abbreviated as ‘world’) journals, with each being in the same JCR subject category and having similar impact factors as their Chinese counterparts. Generally, Chinese journals tended to be higher in all the three self-citation rates than world journal counterparts. Particularly, a few Chinese scientific journals had much higher self-citation rates. Conclusions/Significance Our results show that generally Chinese scientific journals have higher self-citation rates than those of world journals. Consequently, Chinese scientific journals tend to have lower visibility and are more isolated in the relevant fields. Considering the fact that sciences are rapidly developing in China and so are Chinese scientific journals, we expect that the differences of journal self-citation rates between Chinese and world scientific journals will gradually disappear in the future. Some suggestions to solve the problems are presented. PMID:23173041

Zebrafish in Brazilian Science: Scientific Production, Impact, and Collaboration.

PubMed

Gheno, Ediane Maria; Rosemberg, Denis Broock; Souza, Diogo Onofre; Calabró, Luciana

2016-06-01

By means of scientometric indicators, this study investigated the characteristics of scientific production and research collaboration involving zebrafish (Danio rerio) in Brazilian Science indexed by the Web of Science (WoS). Citation data were collected from the WoS and data regarding Impact Factor (IF) were gathered from journals in the Journal Citation Reports. Collaboration was evaluated according to coauthorship data, creating representative nets with VOSviewer. Zebrafish has attained remarkable importance as an experimental model organism in recent years and an increase in scientific production with zebrafish is observed in Brazil and around the world. The citation impact of the worldwide scientific production is superior when compared to the Brazilian scientific production. However, the citation impact of the Brazilian scientific production is consistently increasing. Brazil does not follow the international trends with regard to publication research fields. The state of Rio Grande do Sul has the greatest number of articles and the institution with the largest number of publications is Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul. Journals' average IF is higher in Brazilian publications with international coauthorship, and around 90% of articles are collaborative. The Brazilian institutions presenting the greatest number of collaborations are Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Fundação Universidade Federal de Rio Grande, and Universidade de São Paulo. These data indicate that Brazilian research using zebrafish presents a growth in terms of number of publications, citation impact, and collaborative work.

Zebrafish in Brazilian Science: Scientific Production, Impact, and Collaboration

PubMed Central

Gheno, Ediane Maria; Rosemberg, Denis Broock; Souza, Diogo Onofre

2016-01-01

Abstract By means of scientometric indicators, this study investigated the characteristics of scientific production and research collaboration involving zebrafish (Danio rerio) in Brazilian Science indexed by the Web of Science (WoS). Citation data were collected from the WoS and data regarding Impact Factor (IF) were gathered from journals in the Journal Citation Reports. Collaboration was evaluated according to coauthorship data, creating representative nets with VOSviewer. Zebrafish has attained remarkable importance as an experimental model organism in recent years and an increase in scientific production with zebrafish is observed in Brazil and around the world. The citation impact of the worldwide scientific production is superior when compared to the Brazilian scientific production. However, the citation impact of the Brazilian scientific production is consistently increasing. Brazil does not follow the international trends with regard to publication research fields. The state of Rio Grande do Sul has the greatest number of articles and the institution with the largest number of publications is Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul. Journals' average IF is higher in Brazilian publications with international coauthorship, and around 90% of articles are collaborative. The Brazilian institutions presenting the greatest number of collaborations are Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Fundação Universidade Federal de Rio Grande, and Universidade de São Paulo. These data indicate that Brazilian research using zebrafish presents a growth in terms of number of publications, citation impact, and collaborative work. PMID:27045850

Citation Analysis of Hepatitis Monthly by Journal Citation Report (ISI), Google Scholar, and Scopus

PubMed Central

Miri, Seyyed Mohammad; Raoofi, Azam; Heidari, Zahra

2012-01-01

Background Citation analysis as one of the most widely used methods of bibliometrics can be used for computing the various impact measures for scholars based on data from citation databases. Journal Citation Reports (JCR) from Thomson Reuters provides annual report in the form of impact factor (IF) for each journal. Objectives We aimed to evaluate the citation parameters of Hepatitis Monthly by JCR in 2010 and compare them with GS and Sc. Materials and Methods All articles of Hepat Mon published in 2009 and 2008 which had been cited in 2010 in three databases including WoS, Sc and GS gathered in a spreadsheet. The IFs were manually calculated. Results Among the 104 total published articles the accuracy rates of GS and Sc in recording the total number of articles was 96% and 87.5%. There was a difference between IFs among the three databases (0.793 in ISI [Institute for Scientific Information], 0.945 in Sc and 0.85 GS). The missing rate of citations in ISI was 4% totally. Original articles were the main cited types, whereas, guidelines and clinical challenges were the least ones. Conclusions None of the three databases succeed to record all articles published in the journal. Despite high sensitivity of GS comparing to Sc, it cannot be a reliable source for indexing since GS has lack of screening in the data collection and low specificity. Using an average of three IFs is suggested to find the correct IF. Editors should be more aware on the role of original articles in increasing IF and the potential efficacy of review articles in long term impact factor. PMID:23087765

Is there publication bias towards brazilian articles on cancer?

PubMed Central

Loureiro, Luiz Victor Maia; Callegaro, Donato; Rocha, Altieres de Arruda; Prado, Bernard Lobato; Mutão, Taciana Sousa; Donnarumma, Carlos del Cistia; del Giglio, Auro

2013-01-01

ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate whether Brazilian articles on cancer are published in journals with an impact factor and/or repercussion (measured by the number of citations) inferior to those that come from foreign organizations. Methods: A search was carried out in PubMed for the MeSH term “neoplasm” with the limits clinical trial, affiliation of the Brazilian author(s), and interval from July 1st, 2009 to June 30, 2010. Selected for matching were non-Brazilian related articles published from three months prior to three months after the date of publication of the Brazilian study. The numbers of citations were obtained from two databases, as well as the impact factor for the journals in which the articles were published. Results: Fortythree national and 876 related international articles were identified. The Brazilian publications had a mean impact factor of 3.000 versus 3.430 of the international ones (p=0.041). There was no statistically significant difference as to the number of citations between the two groups. The affiliation of the first author with a Brazilian or foreign organization did not significantly influence the number of citations or the impact factor. Conclusion: Brazilian articles are significantly less accepted in journals with higher impact factors, although it does not compromise its repercussion on the scientific community. PMID:23579739

Impact of Article Language in Multi-Language Medical Journals - a Bibliometric Analysis of Self-Citations and Impact Factor

PubMed Central

Diekhoff, Torsten; Schlattmann, Peter; Dewey, Marc

2013-01-01

Background In times of globalization there is an increasing use of English in the medical literature. The aim of this study was to analyze the influence of English-language articles in multi-language medical journals on their international recognition – as measured by a lower rate of self-citations and higher impact factor (IF). Methods and Findings We analyzed publications in multi-language journals in 2008 and 2009 using the Web of Science (WoS) of Thomson Reuters (former Institute of Scientific Information) and PubMed as sources of information. The proportion of English-language articles during the period was compared with both the share of self-citations in the year 2010 and the IF with and without self-citations. Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to analyze these factors as well as the influence of the journals‘ countries of origin and of the other language(s) used in publications besides English. We identified 168 multi-language journals that were listed in WoS as well as in PubMed and met our criteria. We found a significant positive correlation of the share of English articles in 2008 and 2009 with the IF calculated without self-citations (Pearson r=0.56, p = <0.0001), a correlation with the overall IF (Pearson r = 0.47, p = <0.0001) and with the cites to years of IF calculation (Pearson r = 0.34, p = <0.0001), and a weak negative correlation with the share of self-citations (Pearson r = -0.2, p = 0.009). The IF without self-citations also correlated with the journal‘s country of origin – North American journals had a higher IF compared to Middle and South American or European journals. Conclusion Our findings suggest that a larger share of English articles in multi-language medical journals is associated with greater international recognition. Fewer self-citations were found in multi-language journals with a greater share of original articles in English. PMID:24146929

Brief alcohol intervention trials conducted by higher prestige authors and published in higher impact factor journals are cited more frequently.

PubMed

Tanner-Smith, Emily E; Polanin, Joshua R

2016-07-01

To examine the relationships between study quality, author prestige, journal impact factors, and citation rates of trials and to examine whether journal impact factors mediated the relationships between study quality and author prestige on citation rates. We used bibliometric data from 128 controlled trials included in a recent meta-analysis on brief alcohol interventions for adolescents and young adults. We obtained the number of citations from ISI Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar; journal impact factors were obtained from ISI Web of Knowledge. Linear regression models were used to examine the direct and indirect effects of interest. The results indicated that studies were published in journals with higher impact factors when first authors had higher h-indices and studies were funded, but this was largely because those studies were of higher quality. Studies were cited more frequently when first authors had higher h-indices and studies were funded, even after adjusting for study quality proxies. The observed associations between study quality and author prestige on citation rates were also partly mediated through journal impact factors. We conclude that studies conducted by more established authors and reported in more prestigious journal outlets are more likely to be cited by other scholars, even after controlling for various proxies of study quality. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Does Collocation Inform the Impact of Collaboration?

PubMed Central

Lee, Kyungjoon; Brownstein, John S.; Mills, Richard G.; Kohane, Isaac S.

2010-01-01

Background It has been shown that large interdisciplinary teams working across geography are more likely to be impactful. We asked whether the physical proximity of collaborators remained a strong predictor of the scientific impact of their research as measured by citations of the resulting publications. Methodology/Principal Findings Articles published by Harvard investigators from 1993 to 2003 with at least two authors were identified in the domain of biomedical science. Each collaboration was geocoded to the precise three-dimensional location of its authors. Physical distances between any two coauthors were calculated and associated with corresponding citations. Relationship between distance of coauthors and citations for four author relationships (first-last, first-middle, last-middle, and middle-middle) were investigated at different spatial scales. At all sizes of collaborations (from two authors to dozens of authors), geographical proximity between first and last author is highly informative of impact at the microscale (i.e. within building) and beyond. The mean citation for first-last author relationship decreased as the distance between them increased in less than one km range as well as in the three categorized ranges (in the same building, same city, or different city). Such a trend was not seen in other three author relationships. Conclusions/Significance Despite the positive impact of emerging communication technologies on scientific research, our results provide striking evidence for the role of physical proximity as a predictor of the impact of collaborations. PMID:21179507

Brief Alcohol Intervention Trials Conducted by Higher Prestige Authors and Published in Higher Impact Factor Journals are Cited More Frequently

PubMed Central

Tanner-Smith, Emily E.; Polanin, Joshua R.

2016-01-01

Objective To examine the relationships between study quality, author prestige, journal impact factors, and citation rates of trials; and to examine whether journal impact factors mediated the relationships between study quality and author prestige on citation rates. Study Design and Setting We used bibliometric data from 128 controlled trials included in a recent meta-analysis on brief alcohol interventions (BAIs) for adolescents and young adults. We obtained the number of citations from ISI Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar; journal impact factors were obtained from ISI Web of Knowledge. Linear regression models were used to examine the direct and indirect effects of interest. Results The results indicated that studies were published in journals with higher impact factors when first authors had higher h-indices and studies were funded, but this was largely because those studies were of higher quality. Studies were cited more frequently when first authors had higher h-indices and studies were funded, even after adjusting for study quality proxies. The observed associations between study quality and author prestige on citation rates were also partly mediated through journal impact factors. Conclusion We conclude that studies conducted by more established authors and reported in more prestigious journal outlets are more likely to be cited by other scholars, even after controlling for various proxies of study quality. PMID:26854420

Taking Advantage of Citation Measures of Scholarly Impact: Hip Hip h Index!

PubMed

Ruscio, John

2016-11-01

Professional decisions about hiring, tenure, promotion, funding, and honors are informed by assessments of scholarly impact. As a measure of influence, citations are produced by experts but accessible to nonexperts. The h index is the largest number h such that an individual has published at least h works cited at least h times apiece. This is easy to understand and calculate, as or more reliable and valid than alternative citation measures, and highly robust to missing or messy data. Striving for a large h index requires both productivity and influence, which provides healthy incentives for researchers striving for eminence through scientific impact. A number of factors that can influence h are discussed to promote the mindful use of what might otherwise be an ambiguous or misleading measure. The h index adds a transparent, objective component to assessments of scholarly impact, and even academic eminence, that merits at least two cheers. © The Author(s) 2016.

Statistical regularities in the rank-citation profile of scientists

PubMed Central

Petersen, Alexander M.; Stanley, H. Eugene; Succi, Sauro

2011-01-01

Recent science of science research shows that scientific impact measures for journals and individual articles have quantifiable regularities across both time and discipline. However, little is known about the scientific impact distribution at the scale of an individual scientist. We analyze the aggregate production and impact using the rank-citation profile ci(r) of 200 distinguished professors and 100 assistant professors. For the entire range of paper rank r, we fit each ci(r) to a common distribution function. Since two scientists with equivalent Hirsch h-index can have significantly different ci(r) profiles, our results demonstrate the utility of the βi scaling parameter in conjunction with hi for quantifying individual publication impact. We show that the total number of citations Ci tallied from a scientist's Ni papers scales as . Such statistical regularities in the input-output patterns of scientists can be used as benchmarks for theoretical models of career progress. PMID:22355696

Methodological quality and scientific impact of quantitative nursing education research over 18 months.

PubMed

Yucha, Carolyn B; Schneider, Barbara St Pierre; Smyer, Tish; Kowalski, Susan; Stowers, Eva

2011-01-01

The methodological quality of nursing education research has not been rigorously studied. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the methodological quality and scientific impact of nursing education research reports. The methodological quality of 133 quantitative nursing education research articles published between July 2006 and December 2007 was evaluated using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).The mean (+/- SD) MERSQI score was 9.8 +/- 2.2. It correlated (p < .05) with several scientific impact indicators: citation counts from Scopus (r = .223), Google Scholar (r = .224), and journal impact factor (r = .216); it was not associated with Web of Science citation count, funding, or h Index. The similarities between this study's MERSQI ratings for nursing literature and those reported for the medical literature, coupled with the association with citation counts, suggest that the MERSQI is an appropriate instrument to evaluate the quality of nursing education research.

Reputation and impact in academic careers.

PubMed

Petersen, Alexander Michael; Fortunato, Santo; Pan, Raj K; Kaski, Kimmo; Penner, Orion; Rungi, Armando; Riccaboni, Massimo; Stanley, H Eugene; Pammolli, Fabio

2014-10-28

Reputation is an important social construct in science, which enables informed quality assessments of both publications and careers of scientists in the absence of complete systemic information. However, the relation between reputation and career growth of an individual remains poorly understood, despite recent proliferation of quantitative research evaluation methods. Here, we develop an original framework for measuring how a publication's citation rate Δc depends on the reputation of its central author i, in addition to its net citation count c. To estimate the strength of the reputation effect, we perform a longitudinal analysis on the careers of 450 highly cited scientists, using the total citations Ci of each scientist as his/her reputation measure. We find a citation crossover c×, which distinguishes the strength of the reputation effect. For publications with c < c×, the author's reputation is found to dominate the annual citation rate. Hence, a new publication may gain a significant early advantage corresponding to roughly a 66% increase in the citation rate for each tenfold increase in Ci. However, the reputation effect becomes negligible for highly cited publications meaning that, for c ≥ c×, the citation rate measures scientific impact more transparently. In addition, we have developed a stochastic reputation model, which is found to reproduce numerous statistical observations for real careers, thus providing insight into the microscopic mechanisms underlying cumulative advantage in science.

Reputation and impact in academic careers

PubMed Central

Petersen, Alexander Michael; Fortunato, Santo; Pan, Raj K.; Kaski, Kimmo; Penner, Orion; Rungi, Armando; Riccaboni, Massimo; Stanley, H. Eugene; Pammolli, Fabio

2014-01-01

Reputation is an important social construct in science, which enables informed quality assessments of both publications and careers of scientists in the absence of complete systemic information. However, the relation between reputation and career growth of an individual remains poorly understood, despite recent proliferation of quantitative research evaluation methods. Here, we develop an original framework for measuring how a publication’s citation rate Δc depends on the reputation of its central author i, in addition to its net citation count c. To estimate the strength of the reputation effect, we perform a longitudinal analysis on the careers of 450 highly cited scientists, using the total citations Ci of each scientist as his/her reputation measure. We find a citation crossover c×, which distinguishes the strength of the reputation effect. For publications with c < c×, the author’s reputation is found to dominate the annual citation rate. Hence, a new publication may gain a significant early advantage corresponding to roughly a 66% increase in the citation rate for each tenfold increase in Ci. However, the reputation effect becomes negligible for highly cited publications meaning that, for c ≥ c×, the citation rate measures scientific impact more transparently. In addition, we have developed a stochastic reputation model, which is found to reproduce numerous statistical observations for real careers, thus providing insight into the microscopic mechanisms underlying cumulative advantage in science. PMID:25288774

Publication in a Brazilian journal by Brazilian scientists whose papers have international impact.

PubMed

Meneghini, R

2010-09-01

Nine Brazilian scientists with an outstanding profile of international publications were invited to publish an original article in the same issue of a Brazilian Journal (Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências). The objective was to measure the impact of the papers on the number of citations to the articles, the assumption being that these authors would carry their international prestige to the Brazilian periodical. In a 2-year period there was a larger number of citations of these articles compared to others published in the same journal. Nevertheless, the number of citations in Brazilian journals did not equal the number of citations obtained by the other papers by the same authors in their international publications within the same 2-year period. The reasons for this difference in the number of citations could be either that less significant invited articles were submitted or that it was due to the intrinsic lack of visibility of the Brazilian journals, but this could not be fully determined with the present data. Also relevant was a comparison between the citations of Brazilian journals and the publication in Brazilian journals by these selected authors. A clear imbalance due to a remarkable under-citation of Brazilian authors by authors publishing in Brazilian journals raises the possibility that psychological factors may affect the decision of citing Brazilian journals.

Analysis of self-citation and impact factor in dermatology journals.

PubMed

Reiter, Ofer; Mimouni, Michael; Mimouni, Daniel

2016-09-01

Concerns have been raised regarding the impact factor's (IF) accuracy and credibility, which may be affected by different factors, including self-citations. To investigate the self-citation rate (SCR) of dermatology journals and its relationship to the IF. Data on all dermatology journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) were retrieved, and the following parameters were analyzed: IF, total publications used to calculate the IF, total citations used to calculate the IF, self-citations used to calculate the IF, SCR, and IF without self-citations (corrected IF). The median SCR was 10.53% (0-50%), and the median IF and corrected IF, 1.54 (0.05-6.37) and 1.35 (0.03-5.84), respectively. There was an inverse correlation between the IF and the SCR. A statistically significant difference was noted in the SCR between general and subspecialty journals and between journals that offered a full English text and those that did not. In general, the IF of dermatology journals is not influenced by the SCR. However, journals with a lower IF tend to have a higher SCR. Subspecialty journals and foreign language journals have a higher SCR than general dermatology and English language journals, respectively, probably owing to their limited distribution and the difficulty experienced by international authors in accessing references in specific languages. © 2015 The International Society of Dermatology.

Reprint of "Citation analysis as a measure of article quality, journal influence and individual researcher performance".

PubMed

Nightingale, Julie M; Marshall, Gill

2013-09-01

The research-related performance of universities, as well as that of individual researchers, is increasingly evaluated through the use of objective measures, or metrics, which seek to support or in some cases even replace more traditional methods of peer review. In particular there is a growing awareness in research communities, government organisations and funding bodies around the concept of using evaluation metrics to analyse research citations. The tools available for 'citation analysis' are many and varied, enabling a quantification of scientific quality, academic impact and prestige. However there is increasing concern regarding the potential misuse of such tools, which have limitations in certain research disciplines.This article uses 'real world' examples from radiography research and scholarship to illustrate the range of currently available citation analysis tools. It explores the academic debate surrounding their strengths and limitations, and identifies the potential impact of citation analysis on the radiography research community.The article concludes that citation analysis is a valuable tool for researchers to use for personal reflection and research planning, yet there are inherent dangers if it is used inappropriately. Whilst citation analysis can give objective information regarding an individual, research group, journal or higher education institution, it should not be used as a total substitute for traditional qualitative review and peer assessment. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

High-ranked social science journal articles can be identified from early citation information.

PubMed

Stern, David I

2014-01-01

Do citations accumulate too slowly in the social sciences to be used to assess the quality of recent articles? I investigate whether this is the case using citation data for all articles in economics and political science published in 2006 and indexed in the Web of Science. I find that citations in the first two years after publication explain more than half of the variation in cumulative citations received over a longer period. Journal impact factors improve the correlation between the predicted and actual future ranks of journal articles when using citation data from 2006 alone but the effect declines sharply thereafter. Finally, more than half of the papers in the top 20% in 2012 were already in the top 20% in the year of publication (2006).

High-Ranked Social Science Journal Articles Can Be Identified from Early Citation Information

PubMed Central

Stern, David I.

2014-01-01

Do citations accumulate too slowly in the social sciences to be used to assess the quality of recent articles? I investigate whether this is the case using citation data for all articles in economics and political science published in 2006 and indexed in the Web of Science. I find that citations in the first two years after publication explain more than half of the variation in cumulative citations received over a longer period. Journal impact factors improve the correlation between the predicted and actual future ranks of journal articles when using citation data from 2006 alone but the effect declines sharply thereafter. Finally, more than half of the papers in the top 20% in 2012 were already in the top 20% in the year of publication (2006). PMID:25390035

How far has The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine advanced in terms of journal metrics?

PubMed

Huh, Sun

2013-11-01

The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine has already been valued as an international journal, according to a citation analysis in 2011. Now, 2 years later, I would like to confirm how much the Journal has advanced from the point of view of journal metrics by looking at the impact factor, cites per document (2 years), SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), and the Hirsch index. These were obtained from a variety of databases, such as the Korean Medical Citation Index, KoreaMed Synapse, Web of Science, JCR Web, and SCImago Journal & Country Rank. The manually calculated 2012 impact factor was 1.252 in the Web of Science, with a ranking of 70/151 (46.4%) in the category of general and internal medicine. Cites per documents (2 years) for 2012 was 1.619, with a ranking of 267/1,588 (16.8%) in the category of medicine (miscellaneous). The 2012 SJR was 0.464, with a ranking of 348/1,588 (21.9%) in the category of medicine (miscellaneous). The Hirsch index from KoreaMed Synapse, Web of Science, and SCImago Journal & Country Rank were 12, 15, and 19, respectively. In comparison with data from 2010, the values of all the journal metrics increased consistently. These results reflect favorably on the increased competency of editors and authors of The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine.

How far has The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine advanced in terms of journal metrics?

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine has already been valued as an international journal, according to a citation analysis in 2011. Now, 2 years later, I would like to confirm how much the Journal has advanced from the point of view of journal metrics by looking at the impact factor, cites per document (2 years), SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), and the Hirsch index. These were obtained from a variety of databases, such as the Korean Medical Citation Index, KoreaMed Synapse, Web of Science, JCR Web, and SCImago Journal & Country Rank. The manually calculated 2012 impact factor was 1.252 in the Web of Science, with a ranking of 70/151 (46.4%) in the category of general and internal medicine. Cites per documents (2 years) for 2012 was 1.619, with a ranking of 267/1,588 (16.8%) in the category of medicine (miscellaneous). The 2012 SJR was 0.464, with a ranking of 348/1,588 (21.9%) in the category of medicine (miscellaneous). The Hirsch index from KoreaMed Synapse, Web of Science, and SCImago Journal & Country Rank were 12, 15, and 19, respectively. In comparison with data from 2010, the values of all the journal metrics increased consistently. These results reflect favorably on the increased competency of editors and authors of The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine. PMID:24307835

Scientist impact factor (SIF): a new metric for improving scientists' evaluation?

PubMed

Lippi, Giuseppe; Mattiuzzi, Camilla

2017-08-01

The publication of scientific research is the mainstay for knowledge dissemination, but is also an essential criterion of scientists' evaluation for recruiting funds and career progression. Although the most widespread approach for evaluating scientists is currently based on the H-index, the total impact factor (IF) and the overall number of citations, these metrics are plagued by some well-known drawbacks. Therefore, with the aim to improve the process of scientists' evaluation, we developed a new and potentially useful indicator of recent scientific output. The new metric scientist impact factor (SIF) was calculated as all citations of articles published in the two years following the publication year of the articles, divided by the overall number of articles published in that year. The metrics was then tested by analyzing data of the 40 top scientists of the local University. No correlation was found between SIF and H-index (r=0.15; P=0.367) or 2 years H-index (r=-0.01; P=0.933), whereas the H-index and 2 years H-index values were found to be highly correlated (r=0.57; P<0.001). A highly significant correlation was also observed between the articles published in one year and the total number of citations to these articles in the two following years (r=0.62; P<0.001). According to our data, the SIF may be a useful measure to complement current metrics for evaluating scientific output. Its use may be especially helpful for young scientists, wherein the SIF reflects the scientific output over the past two years thus increasing their chances to apply to and obtain competitive funding.

Scientist impact factor (SIF): a new metric for improving scientists’ evaluation?

PubMed Central

Mattiuzzi, Camilla

2017-01-01

Background The publication of scientific research is the mainstay for knowledge dissemination, but is also an essential criterion of scientists’ evaluation for recruiting funds and career progression. Although the most widespread approach for evaluating scientists is currently based on the H-index, the total impact factor (IF) and the overall number of citations, these metrics are plagued by some well-known drawbacks. Therefore, with the aim to improve the process of scientists’ evaluation, we developed a new and potentially useful indicator of recent scientific output. Methods The new metric scientist impact factor (SIF) was calculated as all citations of articles published in the two years following the publication year of the articles, divided by the overall number of articles published in that year. The metrics was then tested by analyzing data of the 40 top scientists of the local University. Results No correlation was found between SIF and H-index (r=0.15; P=0.367) or 2 years H-index (r=−0.01; P=0.933), whereas the H-index and 2 years H-index values were found to be highly correlated (r=0.57; P<0.001). A highly significant correlation was also observed between the articles published in one year and the total number of citations to these articles in the two following years (r=0.62; P<0.001). Conclusions According to our data, the SIF may be a useful measure to complement current metrics for evaluating scientific output. Its use may be especially helpful for young scientists, wherein the SIF reflects the scientific output over the past two years thus increasing their chances to apply to and obtain competitive funding. PMID:28856143

Part II: Should the h-index be modified? An analysis of the m-quotient, contemporary h-index, authorship value, and impact factor.

PubMed

Khan, Nickalus R; Thompson, Clinton J; Taylor, Douglas R; Gabrick, Kyle S; Choudhri, Asim F; Boop, Frederick R; Klimo, Paul

2013-12-01

The widely accepted h-index depends on the citation analysis source and does not consider the authorship position, the journal's impact factor (IF), or the age of the paper or author. We investigated these factors in citation statistics of academic neurosurgeons. An uncorrected h-index and the m-quotient, which corrects for career length, were calculated by the use of Scopus and Google Scholar. In a subset of neurosurgeons, we computed the contemporary h-index (hc), which accounts for the age of the publications; the authorship value (AV), weighted by author position; and the journal IF. An "overall' average for AV and IF including most of an author's publications and an average for publications comprising the h-index ("h-index core") were calculated. When we used Google Scholar, the mean h-index was significantly greater than that calculated when we used Scopus (P = 0.0030). m-quotient and hc-index increased with academic rank, with an m-quotient >1 achieved by 69% of chairmen and 48% of professors. The effect of AV was greatest on the greater h-indices. The average IF for the h-index core was greater than the overall IF, which did not correlate with academic rank. Few neurosurgeons consistently publish in high-impact journals. Google Scholar tends to inflate the h-index. The m-quotient and hc-index allow comparisons of researchers across time. Although average journal IF did not differ significantly among neurosurgeons academic ranks, it should be noted for individuals who consistently publish in high-impact journals. We recommend the creation of individual bibliometric profiles to better compare the academic productivity of neurosurgeons. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Historical bibliometric analysis of the top cited articles on vesicoureteral reflux 1950-2016, and incorporation of a novel impact index.

PubMed

Fernandez, N; Puerto, A; Azuero, A; O'Kelly, F; Hannick, J; Rickard, M; Kirsch, A; Caldamone, A; Koyle, M

2018-04-24

Vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) has been one of the defining conditions unique to pediatric urology since its inception. The clinical implications of this disease process depend on intrinsic patient factors such as age, genetics, epigenetics, voiding habits, anatomic anomalies, and extrinsic factors such as the pathogenicity of infectious agents. Knowledge about its natural history, the implications of conservative and surgical management, and their associated outcomes have evolved dramatically over time. This study aimed to use bibliometric analyses to summarize the evolution of VUR management over time. In order to accomplish this, the most referenced articles for VUR since 1950 were identified, and a comprehensive analysis of their impact on the management and understanding of VUR was performed by creating a novel impact index. A reference search was carried out for indexed citations through the portal 'Science Citation Index' in the subsection 'Web of Science Core Collection' using 'vesicoureteral reflux' as a MeSH term. References were analyzed and subcategorized according to various subtopics. A unique impact index was developed to adjust the number of publications for the time since publication, in order to define the impact of the paper amongst the most frequently cited papers. Articles were analyzed and data were tabulated according to the number of citations, country and institute of origin, journal of publication, impact factor, and first authorship. Citation counts ranged from 43 to 510, and the mean number of citations per publication was 101.43. The most discussed topic was 'treatment'. The impact index showed that more recent publications have a higher impact. The author with the highest index impact had 271 citations in a period of 5 years. The top 150 articles were published across 23 countries, the majority being from the USA (Summary fig.). The most frequently cited institution had 12 publications. The journal with the highest publication referencing rate was the Journal of Urology. The most cited articles were valuable sources of information to describe the historical evolution of the pathophysiology and management of VUR. After adjusting for time since publication, the most recent publications (i.e. those published after 1990) had a higher impact index. Combining traditional bibliometric analysis with this novel impact index may allow researchers to optimize future literature analyses, while also assisting clinicians in understanding best practices for patient management based on the available literature. Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Clinical trials in Brazilian journals of ophthalmology: where we are.

PubMed

Lira, Rodrigo Pessoa Cavalcanti; Leal, Franz Schubert; Gonçalves, Fauze Abdulmassih; Amorim, Fernando Henrique Ramos; Felix, João Paulo Fernandes; Arieta, Carlos Eduardo Leite

2013-01-01

To compare clinical trials published in Brazilian journals of ophthalmology and in foreign journals of ophthalmology with respect to the number of citations and the quality of reporting [by applying the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement writing standards]. The sample of this systematic review comprised the two Brazilian journals of ophthalmology indexed at Science Citation Index Expanded and six of the foreign journals of ophthalmology with highest Impact Factor® according ISI. All clinical trials (CTs) published from January 2009 to December 2010 at the Brazilians journals and a 1:1 randomized sample of the foreign journals were included. The primary outcome was the number of citations through the end of 2011. Subgroup analysis included language. The secondary outcome included likelihood of citation (cited at least once versus no citation), and presence or absence of CONSORT statement indicators. The citation counts were statistically significantly higher (P<0.001) in the Foreign Group (10.50) compared with the Brazilian Group (0.45). The likelihood citation was statistically significantly higher (P<0.001) in the Foreign Group (20/20 - 100%) compared with the Brazilian Group (8/20 - 40%). The subgroup analysis of the language influence in Brazilian articles showed that the citation counts were statistically significantly higher in the papers published in English (P<0.04). Of 37 possible CONSORT items, the mean for the Foreign Group was 20.55 and for the Brazilian Group was 13.65 (P<0.003). The number of citations and the quality of reporting of clinical trials in Brazilian journals of ophthalmology still are low when compared with the foreign journals of ophthalmology with highest Impact Factor®.

[National and international impact factor of Actas Españolas de Psiquiatría].

PubMed

Aleixandre Benavent, R; Valderrama Zurián, J C; Castellano Gómez, M; Simó Meléndez, R; Navarro Molina, C

2004-01-01

The aim of this paper is to present the bibliometric indicators of Actas Españolas de Psiquiatría that were obtained from the study "Potential impact factor of the Spanish medical journals in 2001", financed by the Spanish Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. The citations made in Actas Españolas de Psiquiatría and its national and international impact factor and immediacy index have been obtained by the use of a methodology similar to the one used by the Institute for Scientific Information. The national indicators only take into account the citations made in 87 Spanish journals considered as sources, while those from the foreign source journals of Science Citation Index have been added to the previously cited ones. Actas Españolas de Psiquiatría has obtained a national impact factor of 0.315 and an international impact factor of 0.395, which places it as a leader in the Spanish psychiatric journals.

Dynamics of co-authorship and productivity across different fields of scientific research.

PubMed

Parish, Austin J; Boyack, Kevin W; Ioannidis, John P A

2018-01-01

We aimed to assess which factors correlate with collaborative behavior and whether such behavior associates with scientific impact (citations and becoming a principal investigator). We used the R index which is defined for each author as log(Np)/log(I1), where I1 is the number of co-authors who appear in at least I1 papers written by that author and Np are his/her total papers. Higher R means lower collaborative behavior, i.e. not working much with others, or not collaborating repeatedly with the same co-authors. Across 249,054 researchers who had published ≥30 papers in 2000-2015 but had not published anything before 2000, R varied across scientific fields. Lower values of R (more collaboration) were seen in physics, medicine, infectious disease and brain sciences and higher values of R were seen for social science, computer science and engineering. Among the 9,314 most productive researchers already reaching Np ≥ 30 and I1 ≥ 4 by the end of 2006, R mostly remained stable for most fields from 2006 to 2015 with small increases seen in physics, chemistry, and medicine. Both US-based authorship and male gender were associated with higher values of R (lower collaboration), although the effect was small. Lower values of R (more collaboration) were associated with higher citation impact (h-index), and the effect was stronger in certain fields (physics, medicine, engineering, health sciences) than in others (brain sciences, computer science, infectious disease, chemistry). Finally, for a subset of 400 U.S. researchers in medicine, infectious disease and brain sciences, higher R (lower collaboration) was associated with a higher chance of being a principal investigator by 2016. Our analysis maps the patterns and evolution of collaborative behavior across scientific disciplines.

Heavy use of equations impedes communication among biologists.

PubMed

Fawcett, Tim W; Higginson, Andrew D

2012-07-17

Most research in biology is empirical, yet empirical studies rely fundamentally on theoretical work for generating testable predictions and interpreting observations. Despite this interdependence, many empirical studies build largely on other empirical studies with little direct reference to relevant theory, suggesting a failure of communication that may hinder scientific progress. To investigate the extent of this problem, we analyzed how the use of mathematical equations affects the scientific impact of studies in ecology and evolution. The density of equations in an article has a significant negative impact on citation rates, with papers receiving 28% fewer citations overall for each additional equation per page in the main text. Long, equation-dense papers tend to be more frequently cited by other theoretical papers, but this increase is outweighed by a sharp drop in citations from nontheoretical papers (35% fewer citations for each additional equation per page in the main text). In contrast, equations presented in an accompanying appendix do not lessen a paper's impact. Our analysis suggests possible strategies for enhancing the presentation of mathematical models to facilitate progress in disciplines that rely on the tight integration of theoretical and empirical work.

Author Self-Citation in the Otolaryngology Literature: A Pilot Study.

PubMed

Tolisano, Anthony M; Song, Sungjin A; Cable, Benjamin B

2016-02-01

To determine the prevalence of author self-citation in the field of otolaryngology. A retrospective review of bibliographic references in 5 otolaryngology journals. Five high-impact otolaryngology journals were reviewed over a 3-month period between January and March 2014 to identify the pattern of author self-citations. Data included study type, otolaryngology topic, authorship, total citations, author self-citations, and country of origin. Nearly two-thirds of articles contained at least 1 self-citation, with an average of 2.6 self-citations per article. Self-citations represented nearly 10% of total citations. Articles with at least 1 self-citation had more authors (5.8 vs 4.9, P < .01) and more citations (30.4 vs 22.2, P < .01) per article than did those without self-citations. There was no difference in self-citation practices between articles originating within the United States and abroad (P = .65). Last authors were the most frequent self-citers and were more likely than lead authors to cite themselves (P < .01). Original reports contained the highest percentage of self-citations per article as compared with reviews and case reports (P < .01). Author self-citation in the otolaryngology literature is common and compares similarly to other medical specialties previously studied. Self-citation should not be considered inappropriate, as it is often done to expand on earlier research. Nevertheless, editors, researchers, and readers should be aware of this increasingly recognized phenomenon and its associated potential implications to the process of scientific inquiry. © American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation 2015.

Citation Impact of Women in Social Work: Exploring Gender and Research Culture

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Holosko, Michael J.; Barner, John R.; Allen, Junior Lloyd

2016-01-01

Purpose: We assessed citation impact scholarship of women in the top 25-ranked schools of social work in the United States. Method: We used a mixed methodology. Part 1 was a secondary data analysis of the top-25 "U.S. News and World Report" ranked schools from 2012 using the Hirsch h-index over a 10-year period. Qualitative interviews…

Journal rankings by citation analysis in health sciences librarianship.

PubMed Central

Fang, M L

1989-01-01

The purpose of this study was to identify objectively a hierarchical ranking of journals for health sciences librarians with faculty status. Such a guideline can indicate a journal's value for promotion and tenure consideration. Lists of recent research articles (1982-1986) in health sciences librarianship, and articles written by health sciences librarians, were compiled by searching Social SCISEARCH and MEDLINE. The journals publishing those articles are presented. Results show BMLA as the most prominent journal in the field. Therefore, citations from articles in BMLA from 1982 to 1986 were chosen as a sample for citation analysis. Citation analysis was employed to identify the most frequently cited journals. Some characteristics of the citations in BMLA are also discussed. The ranking of journals based on citation frequency, as a result, was identified. PMID:2655785

Citation analysis of Canadian psycho-oncology and supportive care researchers.

PubMed

Hack, Thomas F; Crooks, Dauna; Plohman, James; Kepron, Emma

2014-02-01

The purpose of this study was to conduct a historical review of psycho-oncology and supportive care research in Canada using citation analysis and to review the clinical impact of the research conducted by the most highly cited researchers. The lifetime journal publication records of 109 psycho-oncology and supportive care researchers in Canada were subject to citation analysis using the Scopus database, based on citations since 1996 of articles deemed relevant to psychosocial oncology and supportive care, excluding self-citations. Three primary types of analysis were performed for each individual: the number of citations for each journal publication, a summative citation count of all published articles, and the Scopus h-index. The top 20 psycho-oncology/supportive care researchers for each of five citation categories are presented: the number of citations for all publications; the number of citations for first-authored publications; the most highly cited first-authored publications; the Scopus h-index for all publications; and the Scopus h-index for first-authored publications. The three most highly cited Canadian psycho-oncology researchers are Dr. Kerry Courneya (University of Alberta), Dr. Lesley Degner, (University of Manitoba), and Dr. Harvey Chochinov (University of Manitoba). Citation analysis is useful for examining the research performance of psycho-oncology and supportive care researchers and identifying leaders among them.

Continuously Variable Rating: a new, simple and logical procedure to evaluate original scientific publications

PubMed Central

Silva, Mauricio Rocha e

2011-01-01

OBJECTIVE: Impact Factors (IF) are widely used surrogates to evaluate single articles, in spite of known shortcomings imposed by cite distribution skewness. We quantify this asymmetry and propose a simple computer-based procedure for evaluating individual articles. METHOD: (a) Analysis of symmetry. Journals clustered around nine Impact Factor points were selected from the medical “Subject Categories” in Journal Citation Reports 2010. Citable items published in 2008 were retrieved and ranked by granted citations over the Jan/2008 - Jun/2011 period. Frequency distribution of cites, normalized cumulative cites and absolute cites/decile were determined for each journal cluster. (b) Positive Predictive Value. Three arbitrarily established evaluation classes were generated: LOW (1.3≤IF<2.6); MID: (2.6≤IF<3.9); HIGH: (IF≥3.9). Positive Predictive Value for journal clusters within each class range was estimated. (c) Continuously Variable Rating. An alternative evaluation procedure is proposed to allow the rating of individually published articles in comparison to all articles published in the same journal within the same year of publication. The general guiding lines for the construction of a totally dedicated software program are delineated. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Skewness followed the Pareto Distribution for (1

Assessing the scholarly impact of health psychology: a citation analysis of articles published from 1993 to 2003.

PubMed

Frosch, Dominick L; Saxbe, Darby; Tomiyama, A Janet; Glenn, Beth A; Low, Carissa A; Hanoch, Yaniv; Motivala, Sarosh J; Meeker, Daniella

2010-09-01

We conducted a citation analysis to explore the impact of articles published in Health Psychology and determine whether the journal is fulfilling its stated mission. Six years of articles (N = 408) representing three editorial tenures from 1993-2003 were selected for analysis. Articles were coded for several dimensions enabling examination of the relationship of article features to subsequent citations rates. Journals citing articles published in Health Psychology were classified into four categories: (1) psychology, (2) medicine, (3) public health and health policy, and (4) other journals. The majority of citations of Health Psychology articles were in psychology journals, followed closely by medical journals. Studies reporting data collected from college students, and discussing the theoretical implications of findings, were more likely to be cited in psychology journals, whereas studies reporting data from clinical populations, and discussing the practice implications of findings, were more likely to be cited in medical journals. Time since publication and page length were both associated with increased citation counts, and review articles were cited more frequently than observational studies. Articles published in Health Psychology have a wide reach, informing psychology, medicine, public health and health policy. Certain characteristics of articles affect their subsequent pattern of citation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).

Eigenfactor score and alternative bibliometrics surpass the impact factor in a 2-years ahead annual-citation calculation: a linear mixed design model analysis of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging journals.

PubMed

Roldan-Valadez, Ernesto; Orbe-Arteaga, Ulises; Rios, Camilo

2018-03-05

Because we believe the journal selection before a manuscript submission deserves further investigation in each medical specialty, we aimed to evaluate the predictive ability of seven bibliometrics in the Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging category of the Web of Knowledge to calculate total citations over a 7-year period. A linear mixed effects design using random slopes and intercepts were performed on bibliometrics corresponding to 124 journals from 2007 to 2011, with their corresponding citations from 2009 to 2013, which appeared in the Journal Citations Report Science Edition. The Eigenfactor Score, Article Influence Score, Cited Half-life, 5-years impact factor and Number of Articles are significant predictors of 2-year-ahead total citations (p ≤ 0.010 for all variables). The impact factor and Immediacy Index are not significant predictors. There was a significant global effect size (R 2  = 0.934; p < 0.001), which yielded a total variance of 93.4%. Our findings support researchers' decision to stop the misuse of IF alone to evaluate journals. Radiologists and other researchers should review journal's bibliometrics for their decision-making during the manuscript submission phase. A re-ranking of journals using Eigenfactor Score, Article Influence Score, and Cited Half-life provides a better assessment of their significance and importance in particular disciplines.

The (lack of) impact of retraction on citation networks.

PubMed

Madlock-Brown, Charisse R; Eichmann, David

2015-02-01

Article retraction in research is rising, yet retracted articles continue to be cited at a disturbing rate. This paper presents an analysis of recent retraction patterns, with a unique emphasis on the role author self-cites play, to assist the scientific community in creating counter-strategies. This was accomplished by examining the following: (1) A categorization of retracted articles more complete than previously published work. (2) The relationship between citation counts and after-retraction self-cites from the authors of the work, and the distribution of self-cites across our retraction categories. (3) The distribution of retractions written by both the author and the editor across our retraction categories. (4) The trends for seven of our nine defined retraction categories over a 6-year period. (5) The average journal impact factor by category, and the relationship between impact factor, author self-cites, and overall citations. Our findings indicate new reasons for retractions have emerged in recent years, and more editors are penning retractions. The rates of increase for retraction varies by category, and there is statistically significant difference of average impact factor between many categories. 18 % of authors self-cite retracted work post retraction with only 10 % of those authors also citing the retraction notice. Further, there is a positive correlation between self-cites and after retraction citations.

The actual citation impact of European oncological research.

PubMed

López-Illescas, Carmen; de Moya-Anegón, Félix; Moed, Henk F

2008-01-01

This study provides an overview of the research performance of major European countries in the field Oncology, the most important journals in which they published their research articles, and the most important academic institutions publishing them. The analysis was based on Thomson Scientific's Web of Science (WoS) and calculated bibliometric indicators of publication activity and actual citation impact. Studying the time period 2000-2006, it gives an update of earlier studies, but at the same time it expands their methodologies, using a broader definition of the field, calculating indicators of actual citation impact, and analysing new and policy relevant aspects. Findings suggest that the emergence of Asian countries in the field Oncology has displaced European articles more strongly than articles from the USA; that oncologists who have published their articles in important, more general journals or in journals covering other specialties, rather than in their own specialist journals, have generated a relatively high actual citation impact; and that universities from Germany, and--to a lesser extent--those from Italy, the Netherlands, UK, and Sweden, dominate a ranking of European universities based on number of articles in oncology. The outcomes illustrate that different bibliometric methodologies may lead to different outcomes, and that outcomes should be interpreted with care.

Metal Matrix Composites: Fatigue and Fracture Testing. (Latest citations from the Aerospace Database)

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1996-01-01

The bibliography contains citations concerning techniques and results of testing metal matrix composites for fatigue and fracture. Methods include non-destructive testing techniques, and static and cyclic techniques for assessing compression, tensile, bending, and impact characteristics.

Citation classics in neurointerventional research: a bibliometric analysis of the 100 most cited articles.

PubMed

Kim, Eun Soo; Yoon, Dae Young; Kim, Hye Jeong; Jeon, Hong Jun; Lee, Jong Young; Cho, Byung-Moon; Lee, Kwanseop

2017-05-01

The number of citations that an article has received can be used to evaluate its impact on the scientific community. This study aimed to identify the 100 most cited articles in the field of neurointervention and to analyze their characteristics. We selected the 669 journals that were considered potentially to publish neurointervention articles based on the database of Journal Citation Reports. Using the Web of Science citation search tool, we identified the 100 most cited articles relevant to neurointervention within the selected journals. Each article was evaluated for several characteristics including publication year, journal, journal category, impact factor, number of citations, number of citations per year, authorship, department, institution, country, type of article, and topic. The number of citations for the top 100 articles ranged from 1912 to 170 (mean 363.4) and citations per year ranged from 271.0 to 4.1 (mean 40.0). The majority of articles were published in clinical neurology journals (63%), were published in 2000-2009 (39%), originated in the USA (45%), were original articles (95%), and dealt with endovascular treatment of cerebral aneurysm (42%). The Department of Radiology, University of California School of Medicine (n=12) was the leading institution and Viñuela F (n=11) was the most prolific author. Our study presents a detailed list and analysis of the 100 most cited articles in the field of neurointervention and provides a historical perspective on the scientific progress in this field. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Citations and the h index of soil researchers and journals in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar

PubMed Central

Hartemink, Alfred E.; McBratney, Alex; Jang, Ho-Jun

2013-01-01

Citation metrics and h indices differ using different bibliometric databases. We compiled the number of publications, number of citations, h index and year since the first publication from 340 soil researchers from all over the world. On average, Google Scholar has the highest h index, number of publications and citations per researcher, and the Web of Science the lowest. The number of papers in Google Scholar is on average 2.3 times higher and the number of citations is 1.9 times higher compared to the data in the Web of Science. Scopus metrics are slightly higher than that of the Web of Science. The h index in Google Scholar is on average 1.4 times larger than Web of Science, and the h index in Scopus is on average 1.1 times larger than Web of Science. Over time, the metrics increase in all three databases but fastest in Google Scholar. The h index of an individual soil scientist is about 0.7 times the number of years since his/her first publication. There is a large difference between the number of citations, number of publications and the h index using the three databases. From this analysis it can be concluded that the choice of the database affects widely-used citation and evaluation metrics but that bibliometric transfer functions exist to relate the metrics from these three databases. We also investigated the relationship between journal’s impact factor and Google Scholar’s h5-index. The h5-index is a better measure of a journal’s citation than the 2 or 5 year window impact factor. PMID:24167778

Citations and the h index of soil researchers and journals in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar.

PubMed

Minasny, Budiman; Hartemink, Alfred E; McBratney, Alex; Jang, Ho-Jun

2013-01-01

Citation metrics and h indices differ using different bibliometric databases. We compiled the number of publications, number of citations, h index and year since the first publication from 340 soil researchers from all over the world. On average, Google Scholar has the highest h index, number of publications and citations per researcher, and the Web of Science the lowest. The number of papers in Google Scholar is on average 2.3 times higher and the number of citations is 1.9 times higher compared to the data in the Web of Science. Scopus metrics are slightly higher than that of the Web of Science. The h index in Google Scholar is on average 1.4 times larger than Web of Science, and the h index in Scopus is on average 1.1 times larger than Web of Science. Over time, the metrics increase in all three databases but fastest in Google Scholar. The h index of an individual soil scientist is about 0.7 times the number of years since his/her first publication. There is a large difference between the number of citations, number of publications and the h index using the three databases. From this analysis it can be concluded that the choice of the database affects widely-used citation and evaluation metrics but that bibliometric transfer functions exist to relate the metrics from these three databases. We also investigated the relationship between journal's impact factor and Google Scholar's h5-index. The h5-index is a better measure of a journal's citation than the 2 or 5 year window impact factor.

Bibliometric Analysis of Manuscript Characteristics That Influence Citations: A Comparison of Six Major Radiology Journals.

PubMed

Shekhani, Haris Naseem; Shariff, Shoaib; Bhulani, Nizar; Khosa, Faisal; Hanna, Tarek Noel

2017-12-01

The objective of our study was to investigate radiology manuscript characteristics that influence citation rate, capturing features of manuscript construction that are discrete from study design. Consecutive articles published from January 2004 to June 2004 were collected from the six major radiology journals with the highest impact factors: Radiology (impact factor, 5.076), Investigative Radiology (2.320), American Journal of Neuroradiology (AJNR) (2.384), RadioGraphics (2.494), European Radiology (2.364), and American Journal of Roentgenology (2.406). The citation count for these articles was retrieved from the Web of Science, and 29 article characteristics were tabulated manually. A point-biserial correlation, Spearman rank-order correlation, and multiple regression model were performed to predict citation number from the collected variables. A total of 703 articles-211 published in Radiology, 48 in Investigative Radiology, 106 in AJNR, 52 in RadioGraphics, 129 in European Radiology, and 157 in AJR-were evaluated. Punctuation was included in the title in 55% of the articles and had the highest statistically significant positive correlation to citation rate (point-biserial correlation coefficient [r pb ] = 0.85, p < 0.05). Open access status provided a low-magnitude, but significant, correlation to citation rate (r pb = 0.140, p < 0.001). The following variables created a significant multiple regression model to predict citation count (p < 0.005, R 2 = 0.186): study findings in the title, abstract word count, abstract character count, total number of words, country of origin, and all authors in the field of radiology. Using bibliometric knowledge, authors can craft a title, abstract, and text that may enhance visibility and citation count over what they would otherwise experience.

A Measure of Total Research Impact Independent of Time and Discipline

PubMed Central

Pepe, Alberto; Kurtz, Michael J.

2012-01-01

Authorship and citation practices evolve with time and differ by academic discipline. As such, indicators of research productivity based on citation records are naturally subject to historical and disciplinary effects. We observe these effects on a corpus of astronomer career data constructed from a database of refereed publications. We employ a simple mechanism to measure research output using author and reference counts available in bibliographic databases to develop a citation-based indicator of research productivity. The total research impact (tori) quantifies, for an individual, the total amount of scholarly work that others have devoted to his/her work, measured in the volume of research papers. A derived measure, the research impact quotient (riq), is an age-independent measure of an individual's research ability. We demonstrate that these measures are substantially less vulnerable to temporal debasement and cross-disciplinary bias than the most popular current measures. The proposed measures of research impact, tori and riq, have been implemented in the Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System. PMID:23144782

Statistical regularities in the rank-citation profile of scientists.

PubMed

Petersen, Alexander M; Stanley, H Eugene; Succi, Sauro

2011-01-01

Recent science of science research shows that scientific impact measures for journals and individual articles have quantifiable regularities across both time and discipline. However, little is known about the scientific impact distribution at the scale of an individual scientist. We analyze the aggregate production and impact using the rank-citation profile c(i)(r) of 200 distinguished professors and 100 assistant professors. For the entire range of paper rank r, we fit each c(i)(r) to a common distribution function. Since two scientists with equivalent Hirsch h-index can have significantly different c(i)(r) profiles, our results demonstrate the utility of the β(i) scaling parameter in conjunction with h(i) for quantifying individual publication impact. We show that the total number of citations C(i) tallied from a scientist's N(i) papers scales as [Formula: see text]. Such statistical regularities in the input-output patterns of scientists can be used as benchmarks for theoretical models of career progress.

Measuring the impact of pharmacoepidemiologic research using altmetrics: A case study of a CNODES drug-safety article.

PubMed

Gamble, J M; Traynor, Robyn L; Gruzd, Anatoliy; Mai, Philip; Dormuth, Colin R; Sketris, Ingrid S

2018-03-24

To provide an overview of altmetrics, including their potential benefits and limitations, how they may be obtained, and their role in assessing pharmacoepidemiologic research impact. Our review was informed by compiling relevant literature identified through searching multiple health research databases (PubMed, Embase, and CIHNAHL) and grey literature sources (websites, blogs, and reports). We demonstrate how pharmacoepidemiologists, in particular, may use altmetrics to understand scholarly impact and knowledge translation by providing a case study of a drug-safety study conducted by the Canadian Network of Observational Drug Effect Studies. A common approach to measuring research impact is the use of citation-based metrics, such as an article's citation count or a journal's impact factor. "Alternative" metrics, or altmetrics, are increasingly supported as a complementary measure of research uptake in the age of social media. Altmetrics are nontraditional indicators that capture a diverse set of traceable, online research-related artifacts including peer-reviewed publications and other research outputs (software, datasets, blogs, videos, posters, policy documents, presentations, social media posts, wiki entries, etc). Compared with traditional citation-based metrics, altmetrics take a more holistic view of research impact, attempting to capture the activity and engagement of both scholarly and nonscholarly communities. Despite the limited theoretical underpinnings, possible commercial influence, potential for gaming and manipulation, and numerous data quality-related issues, altmetrics are promising as a supplement to more traditional citation-based metrics because they can ingest and process a larger set of data points related to the flow and reach of scholarly communication from an expanded pool of stakeholders. Unlike citation-based metrics, altmetrics are not inherently rooted in the research publication process, which includes peer review; it is unclear to what extent they should be used for research evaluation. © 2018 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The assessment of science: the relative merits of post-publication review, the impact factor, and the number of citations.

PubMed

Eyre-Walker, Adam; Stoletzki, Nina

2013-10-01

The assessment of scientific publications is an integral part of the scientific process. Here we investigate three methods of assessing the merit of a scientific paper: subjective post-publication peer review, the number of citations gained by a paper, and the impact factor of the journal in which the article was published. We investigate these methods using two datasets in which subjective post-publication assessments of scientific publications have been made by experts. We find that there are moderate, but statistically significant, correlations between assessor scores, when two assessors have rated the same paper, and between assessor score and the number of citations a paper accrues. However, we show that assessor score depends strongly on the journal in which the paper is published, and that assessors tend to over-rate papers published in journals with high impact factors. If we control for this bias, we find that the correlation between assessor scores and between assessor score and the number of citations is weak, suggesting that scientists have little ability to judge either the intrinsic merit of a paper or its likely impact. We also show that the number of citations a paper receives is an extremely error-prone measure of scientific merit. Finally, we argue that the impact factor is likely to be a poor measure of merit, since it depends on subjective assessment. We conclude that the three measures of scientific merit considered here are poor; in particular subjective assessments are an error-prone, biased, and expensive method by which to assess merit. We argue that the impact factor may be the most satisfactory of the methods we have considered, since it is a form of pre-publication review. However, we emphasise that it is likely to be a very error-prone measure of merit that is qualitative, not quantitative.

The Assessment of Science: The Relative Merits of Post-Publication Review, the Impact Factor, and the Number of Citations

PubMed Central

Eyre-Walker, Adam; Stoletzki, Nina

2013-01-01

The assessment of scientific publications is an integral part of the scientific process. Here we investigate three methods of assessing the merit of a scientific paper: subjective post-publication peer review, the number of citations gained by a paper, and the impact factor of the journal in which the article was published. We investigate these methods using two datasets in which subjective post-publication assessments of scientific publications have been made by experts. We find that there are moderate, but statistically significant, correlations between assessor scores, when two assessors have rated the same paper, and between assessor score and the number of citations a paper accrues. However, we show that assessor score depends strongly on the journal in which the paper is published, and that assessors tend to over-rate papers published in journals with high impact factors. If we control for this bias, we find that the correlation between assessor scores and between assessor score and the number of citations is weak, suggesting that scientists have little ability to judge either the intrinsic merit of a paper or its likely impact. We also show that the number of citations a paper receives is an extremely error-prone measure of scientific merit. Finally, we argue that the impact factor is likely to be a poor measure of merit, since it depends on subjective assessment. We conclude that the three measures of scientific merit considered here are poor; in particular subjective assessments are an error-prone, biased, and expensive method by which to assess merit. We argue that the impact factor may be the most satisfactory of the methods we have considered, since it is a form of pre-publication review. However, we emphasise that it is likely to be a very error-prone measure of merit that is qualitative, not quantitative. PMID:24115908

Alternative Metrics ("Altmetrics") for Assessing Article Impact in Popular General Radiology Journals.

PubMed

Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Ayoola, Abimbola; Singh, Kush; Duszak, Richard

2017-07-01

Emerging alternative metrics leverage social media and other online platforms to provide immediate measures of biomedical articles' reach among diverse public audiences. We aimed to compare traditional citation and alternative impact metrics for articles in popular general radiology journals. All 892 original investigations published in 2013 issues of Academic Radiology, American Journal of Roentgenology, Journal of the American College of Radiology, and Radiology were included. Each article's content was classified as imaging vs nonimaging. Traditional journal citations to articles were obtained from Web of Science. Each article's Altmetric Attention Score (Altmetric), representing weighted mentions across a variety of online platforms, was obtained from Altmetric.com. Statistical assessment included the McNemar test, the Mann-Whitney test, and the Pearson correlation. Mean and median traditional citation counts were 10.7 ± 15.4 and 5 vs 3.3 ± 13.3 and 0 for Altmetric. Among all articles, 96.4% had ≥1 traditional citation vs 41.8% for Altmetric (P < 0.001). Online platforms for which at least 5% of the articles were represented included Mendeley (42.8%), Twitter (34.2%), Facebook (10.7%), and news outlets (8.4%). Citations and Altmetric were weakly correlated (r = 0.20), with only a 25.0% overlap in terms of articles within their top 10th percentiles. Traditional citations were higher for articles with imaging vs nonimaging content (11.5 ± 16.2 vs 6.9 ± 9.8, P < 0.001), but Altmetric scores were higher in articles with nonimaging content (5.1 ± 11.1 vs 2.8 ± 13.7, P = 0.006). Although overall online attention to radiology journal content was low, alternative metrics exhibited unique trends, particularly for nonclinical articles, and may provide a complementary measure of radiology research impact compared to traditional citation counts. Copyright © 2017 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Scientific publications in public, environmental and occupational health journals by authors from China, Japan and Korea in East Asia: A 10-year literature survey from 2003 to 2012.

PubMed

Li, Meina; Liu, Xiaodong; Zhang, Lulu

2015-01-01

To compare the number and quality of public, environmental and occupational health articles published in international journals from the 3 major non-English speaking countries of East Asia: China, Japan and Korea. Public, environmental and occupational health articles from China, Japan and Korea that were published in 161 journals from 2003 to 2012 were retrieved from the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) database. We recorded the numbers of total articles, impact factors (IF), citations, number of articles in top 10 journals, references as well as the article distribution from various regions in China. From 2003 to 2012, China, Japan and Korea published 5713, 3802 and 1967 papers respectively, with accumulated impact factor of 14 934.55, 8758.36 and 6189.25, the average impact factor of 2.61, 2.30 and 3.15 and the average citation numbers per document of 5.08, 6.49 and 5.25. In the top 10 high-impact public, environmental and occupational health journals, China, Japan and Korea accounted for 50.19%, 20.34% and 29.47% of all the papers published in those journals, respectively. Total impact factors of the most popular 10 papers for China, Japan and Korea were: 26.23, 27.08 and 26.91. Distribution of scientific papers among regions was unbalanced in China, for Hong Kong and Taiwan it accounted for 47.31% of the papers from China. From 2003 to 2012, both the quality and number of papers from China published in public, environmental and occupational health journals have greatly improved. China exceeded Japan and Korea in the number, accumulated impact factor, total citation times and the average number of references, while Korea had the highest average impact factor. Japan had the highest journal impact factor among the most popular journals, and the highest average citation number per document. This work is available in Open Access model and licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 PL license.

World citation and collaboration networks: uncovering the role of geography in science

PubMed Central

Pan, Raj Kumar; Kaski, Kimmo; Fortunato, Santo

2012-01-01

Modern information and communication technologies, especially the Internet, have diminished the role of spatial distances and territorial boundaries on the access and transmissibility of information. This has enabled scientists for closer collaboration and internationalization. Nevertheless, geography remains an important factor affecting the dynamics of science. Here we present a systematic analysis of citation and collaboration networks between cities and countries, by assigning papers to the geographic locations of their authors’ affiliations. The citation flows as well as the collaboration strengths between cities decrease with the distance between them and follow gravity laws. In addition, the total research impact of a country grows linearly with the amount of national funding for research & development. However, the average impact reveals a peculiar threshold effect: the scientific output of a country may reach an impact larger than the world average only if the country invests more than about 100,000 USD per researcher annually. PMID:23198092

Bibliographic Analysis of Nature Based on Twitter and Facebook Altmetrics Data

PubMed Central

Xia, Feng; Su, Xiaoyan; Wang, Wei; Zhang, Chenxin; Ning, Zhaolong; Lee, Ivan

2016-01-01

This paper presents a bibliographic analysis of Nature articles based on altmetrics. We assess the concern degree of social users on the Nature articles through the coverage analysis of Twitter and Facebook by publication year and discipline. The social media impact of a Nature article is examined by evaluating the mention rates on Twitter and on Facebook. Moreover, the correlation between tweets and citations is analyzed by publication year, discipline and Twitter user type to explore factors affecting the correlation. The results show that Twitter users have a higher concern degree on Nature articles than Facebook users, and Nature articles have higher and faster-growing impact on Twitter than on Facebook. The results also show that tweets and citations are somewhat related, and they mostly measure different types of impact. In addition, the correlation between tweets and citations highly depends on publication year, discipline and Twitter user type. PMID:27906981

World citation and collaboration networks: uncovering the role of geography in science

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Pan, Raj Kumar; Kaski, Kimmo; Fortunato, Santo

2012-11-01

Modern information and communication technologies, especially the Internet, have diminished the role of spatial distances and territorial boundaries on the access and transmissibility of information. This has enabled scientists for closer collaboration and internationalization. Nevertheless, geography remains an important factor affecting the dynamics of science. Here we present a systematic analysis of citation and collaboration networks between cities and countries, by assigning papers to the geographic locations of their authors' affiliations. The citation flows as well as the collaboration strengths between cities decrease with the distance between them and follow gravity laws. In addition, the total research impact of a country grows linearly with the amount of national funding for research & development. However, the average impact reveals a peculiar threshold effect: the scientific output of a country may reach an impact larger than the world average only if the country invests more than about 100,000 USD per researcher annually.

Bibliographic Analysis of Nature Based on Twitter and Facebook Altmetrics Data.

PubMed

Xia, Feng; Su, Xiaoyan; Wang, Wei; Zhang, Chenxin; Ning, Zhaolong; Lee, Ivan

2016-01-01

This paper presents a bibliographic analysis of Nature articles based on altmetrics. We assess the concern degree of social users on the Nature articles through the coverage analysis of Twitter and Facebook by publication year and discipline. The social media impact of a Nature article is examined by evaluating the mention rates on Twitter and on Facebook. Moreover, the correlation between tweets and citations is analyzed by publication year, discipline and Twitter user type to explore factors affecting the correlation. The results show that Twitter users have a higher concern degree on Nature articles than Facebook users, and Nature articles have higher and faster-growing impact on Twitter than on Facebook. The results also show that tweets and citations are somewhat related, and they mostly measure different types of impact. In addition, the correlation between tweets and citations highly depends on publication year, discipline and Twitter user type.

Citation Impact of Collaboration in Radiology Research.

PubMed

Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Parikh, Ujas; Duszak, Richard

2018-02-01

Team science involving multidisciplinary and multi-institutional collaboration is increasingly recognized as a means of strengthening the quality of scientific research. The aim of this study was to assess associations between various forms of collaboration and the citation impact of published radiology research. In 2010, 876 original research articles published in Academic Radiology, the American Journal of Roentgenology, JACR, and Radiology were identified with at least one radiology-affiliated author. All articles were manually reviewed to extract features related to all authors' disciplines and institutions. Citations to these articles through September 2016 were extracted from Thomson Reuters Web of Science. Subsequent journal article citation counts were significantly higher (P < .05) for original research articles with at least seven versus six or fewer authors (26.2 ± 30.8 versus 20.3 ± 23.1, respectively), with authors from multiple countries versus from a single country (32.3 ± 39.2 versus 22.0 ± 25.0, respectively), with rather than without a nonuniversity collaborator (28.7 ± 38.6 versus 22.4 ± 24.9, respectively), and with rather than without a nonclinical collaborator (26.5 ± 33.1 versus 21.9 ± 24.4, respectively). On multivariate regression analysis, the strongest independent predictors of the number of citations were authors from multiple countries (β = 9.14, P = .002), a nonuniversity collaborator (β = 4.80, P = .082), and at least seven authors (β = 4.11, P = .038). With respect to subsequent journal article citations, various forms of collaboration are associated with greater scholarly impact of published radiology research. To enhance the relevance of their research, radiology investigators are encouraged to pursue collaboration across traditional disciplinary, institutional, and geographic boundaries. Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Environmental Impacts of Metal Cladding Operations and Remedial Measures: A Case Study

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Roy, P. P.; Sawmliana, C.; Singh, R. K.

2014-04-01

In metal cladding operations, a mixture of 11 % TNT flakes, 44 % ammonium nitrate (non-explosive) and 45 % dehydrated salt (non-explosive) are mixed uniformly to produce an explosive mixture with velocity of detonation 1,800-2,000 m/s. To study the environmental impacts of such operations which led to serious complaints from neighbouring villagers and even closure of some units, a study was carried out to investigate the levels of ground vibration, air overpressure and noise generated by blasting operations of different explosive charge quantities during the metal cladding operations and their impacts on the surrounding villages. Following the safety norms of Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB, Model Rules of the Factories Act on Noise Pollution Control) [1] and Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS, Damage to the structures due to blast induced ground vibration in the mining areas) [2] of India, generalised guidelines for such safe operations were framed. This paper describes the operational aspects of metal cladding, experimental results and scientific analyses of data to propose certain guidelines for safe metal cladding operations.

A Comparative Study of Scientific Publications in Health Care Sciences and Services from Mainland China, Taiwan, Japan, and India (2007–2014)

PubMed Central

Lv, Yipeng; Tang, Bihan; Liu, Xu; Xue, Chen; Liu, Yuan; Kang, Peng; Zhang, Lulu

2015-01-01

In this study, we aimed to compare the quantity and quality of publications in health care sciences and services journals from the Chinese mainland, Taiwan, Japan, and India. Journals in this category of the Science Citation Index Expanded were included in the study. Scientific papers were retrieved from the Web of Science online database. Quality was measured according to impact factor, citation of articles, number of articles published in top 10 journals, and the 10 most popular journals by country (area). In the field of health care sciences and services, the annual incremental rates of scientific articles published from 2007 to 2014 were higher than rates of published scientific articles in all fields. Researchers from the Chinese mainland published the most original articles and reviews and had the highest accumulated impact factors, highest total article citations, and highest average citation. Publications from India had the highest average impact factor. In the field of health care sciences and services, China has made remarkable progress during the past eight years in the annual number and percentage of scientific publications. Yet, there is room for improvement in the quantity and quality of such articles. PMID:26712774

A Comparative Study of Scientific Publications in Health Care Sciences and Services from Mainland China, Taiwan, Japan, and India (2007-2014).

PubMed

Lv, Yipeng; Tang, Bihan; Liu, Xu; Xue, Chen; Liu, Yuan; Kang, Peng; Zhang, Lulu

2015-12-24

In this study, we aimed to compare the quantity and quality of publications in health care sciences and services journals from the Chinese mainland, Taiwan, Japan, and India. Journals in this category of the Science Citation Index Expanded were included in the study. Scientific papers were retrieved from the Web of Science online database. Quality was measured according to impact factor, citation of articles, number of articles published in top 10 journals, and the 10 most popular journals by country (area). In the field of health care sciences and services, the annual incremental rates of scientific articles published from 2007 to 2014 were higher than rates of published scientific articles in all fields. Researchers from the Chinese mainland published the most original articles and reviews and had the highest accumulated impact factors, highest total article citations, and highest average citation. Publications from India had the highest average impact factor. In the field of health care sciences and services, China has made remarkable progress during the past eight years in the annual number and percentage of scientific publications. Yet, there is room for improvement in the quantity and quality of such articles.

Author Impact Factor: tracking the dynamics of individual scientific impact

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Pan, Raj Kumar; Fortunato, Santo

2014-05-01

The impact factor (IF) of scientific journals has acquired a major role in the evaluations of the output of scholars, departments and whole institutions. Typically papers appearing in journals with large values of the IF receive a high weight in such evaluations. However, at the end of the day one is interested in assessing the impact of individuals, rather than papers. Here we introduce Author Impact Factor (AIF), which is the extension of the IF to authors. The AIF of an author A in year t is the average number of citations given by papers published in year t to papers published by A in a period of Δt years before year t. Due to its intrinsic dynamic character, AIF is capable to capture trends and variations of the impact of the scientific output of scholars in time, unlike the h-index, which is a growing measure taking into account the whole career path.

Ask the Business School Ranking Media to Walk Their Talk: Rejoinder to "Identifying Research Topic Development in Business and Management Education Research Using Legitimation Code Theory"

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Pearce, Jone L.

2016-01-01

Arbaugh, Fornaciari, and Hwang (2016) are to be commended for undertaking two worthy tasks: demonstrating the value of citation counts in the business and management education (BME) field and attracting new scholars to the field by drawing on rigorous citation analyses. In this commentary, Jone Pearce first addresses the use of citation counts in…

[Does open access publishing increase the impact of scientific articles? An empirical study in the field of intensive care medicine].

PubMed

Riera, M; Aibar, E

2013-05-01

Some studies suggest that open access articles are more often cited than non-open access articles. However, the relationship between open access and citations count in a discipline such as intensive care medicine has not been studied to date. The present article analyzes the effect of open access publishing of scientific articles in intensive care medicine journals in terms of citations count. We evaluated a total of 161 articles (76% being non-open access articles) published in Intensive Care Medicine in the year 2008. Citation data were compared between the two groups up until April 30, 2011. Potentially confounding variables for citation counts were adjusted for in a linear multiple regression model. The median number (interquartile range) of citations of non-open access articles was 8 (4-12) versus 9 (6-18) in the case of open access articles (p=0.084). In the highest citation range (>8), the citation count was 13 (10-16) and 18 (13-21) (p=0.008), respectively. The mean follow-up was 37.5 ± 3 months in both groups. In the 30-35 months after publication, the average number (mean ± standard deviation) of citations per article per month of non-open access articles was 0.28 ± 0.6 versus 0.38 ± 0.7 in the case of open access articles (p=0.043). Independent factors for citation advantage were the Hirsch index of the first signing author (β=0.207; p=0.015) and open access status (β=3.618; p=0.006). Open access publishing and the Hirsch index of the first signing author increase the impact of scientific articles. The open access advantage is greater for the more highly cited articles, and appears in the 30-35 months after publication. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier España, S.L. and SEMICYUC. All rights reserved.

Understanding how orthopaedic surgery practices generate value for healthcare systems.

PubMed

Olson, Steven A; Mather, Richard C

2013-06-01

Orthopaedic surgery practices can provide substantial value to healthcare systems. Increasingly, healthcare administrators are speaking of the need for alignment between physicians and healthcare systems. However, physicians often do not understand what healthcare administrators value and therefore have difficulty articulating the value they create in discussions with their hospital or healthcare organization. Many health systems and hospitals use service lines as an organizational structure to track the relevant data and manage the resources associated with a particular type of care, such as musculoskeletal care. Understanding service lines and their management can be useful for orthopaedic surgeons interested in interacting with their hospital systems. We provide an overview of two basic types of value orthopaedic surgeons create for healthcare systems: financial or volume-driven benefits and nonfinancial quality or value-driven patient care benefits. We performed a search of PubMed from 1965 to 2012 using the term "service line." Of the 351 citations identified, 18 citations specifically involved the use of service lines to improve patient care in both nursing and medical journals. A service line is a structure used in healthcare organizations to enable management of a subset of activities or resources in a focused area of patient care delivery. There is not a consistent definition of what resources are managed within a service line from hospital to hospital. Physicians can positively impact patient care through engaging in service line management. There is increasing pressure for healthcare systems and hospitals to partner with orthopaedic surgeons. The peer-reviewed literature demonstrates there are limited resources for physicians to understand the value they create when attempting to negotiate with their hospital or healthcare organization. To effectively negotiate for resources to provide the best care for patients, orthopaedic surgeons need to claim and demonstrate the value they create in healthcare organizations.

Measuring the social impact of dental research: An insight into the most influential articles on the Web.

PubMed

Delli, K; Livas, C; Spijkervet, F K L; Vissink, A

2017-11-01

To identify the most discussed dental articles on the Web and to assess the association between the intensity of online attention, publication characteristics, and citations. An Altmetric Explorer search was conducted for articles published in the 91 dental journals included in 2015 InCites ™ Journal Citation Report ® and mentioned online at all times. The 100 articles with the highest online attention, as measured by the "Altmetric Attention Score" (AAS), were screened for journal title, quartile of impact factor distribution (Q1-Q4), publication date, origin and affiliation of first author, article topic, type, and access. Citation counts were harvested from Scopus. The top 100 articles presented a median AAS of 119 and were mostly discussed on news outlets, Twitter, and Mendeley. Forty-one articles were published in Q1 journals, 24 in Q2 journals, 32 in Q3 journals, and three in Q4 journals. AAS was significantly higher in articles of Q2 journals (median AAS = 398, range = 70-513) than in articles of Q1. A weak reverse correlation existed between AAS and time since publication (r = -.25, p < .05). No correlation was detected between AAS and other publication characteristics or number of citations. Increased social impact of dental articles is not significantly associated with high citation rates. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. All rights reserved.

Citation trends of applied journals in behavioral psychology 1981-2000.

PubMed

Carr, James E; Britton, Lisa N

2003-01-01

One variable with which to evaluate scientific journals is how often their articles are cited in the literature. Such data are amenable to longitudinal analysis and can be used as a measure of a journal's impact on research within a discipline. We evaluated multiple citation measures for a number of applied journals in behavioral psychology from 1981 to 2000. The results indicate a relatively consistent impact across these journals, with some evidence of growth.

Citation trends of applied journals in behavioral psychology 1981-2000.

PubMed Central

Carr, James E; Britton, Lisa N

2003-01-01

One variable with which to evaluate scientific journals is how often their articles are cited in the literature. Such data are amenable to longitudinal analysis and can be used as a measure of a journal's impact on research within a discipline. We evaluated multiple citation measures for a number of applied journals in behavioral psychology from 1981 to 2000. The results indicate a relatively consistent impact across these journals, with some evidence of growth. PMID:12723874

Structures and Statistics of Citation Networks

DTIC Science & Technology

2011-05-01

the citations among them. The papers are in the field of high- energy physics, and they were added to the online library between 1992-2003. Each paper... energy , physics:astrophysics, mathematics, computer science, statistics and many others. The value of the setSpec field can be any of these. However...the value of the categories field might contain multiple set names listed. For instance, a paper can primarily be considered as a high- energy physics

The impact of the 2007 graduated driver licensing law in Massachusetts on the rate of citations and licensing in teenage drivers.

PubMed

DePesa, Christopher; Raybould, Toby; Hurwitz, Shelley; Lee, Jarone; Gervasini, Alice; Velmahos, George C; Masiakos, Peter T; Kaafarani, Haytham M A

2017-06-01

We recently demonstrated that the 2007 Massachusetts Graduated Driving Licensing (GDL) law decreased the rate of motor vehicle crashes in teenage drivers. To better understand this decrease, we sought to examine the law's impact on the issuance of driving licenses and traffic citations to teenage drivers. Citation and license data were obtained from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. Census data were obtained from the Census Data Center. Two study periods were defined: pre-GDL (2002-2006) and post-GDL (2007-2012). Two populations were defined: the study population (aged 16-17) and the control population (aged 25-29). The rates of licenses per population were compared pre- vs. post-GDL for the study group. The numbers of total, state, and local citations per population were compared pre- vs. post-GDL for both populations. A sensitivity analysis was performed for the rates of citations using licenses issued as a denominator. While licenses per population obtained by the study group decreased over the entire period, there was no change in the rate of decrease per year pre- vs. post-GDL (2.0% vs. 1.4%; p=0.6392). In the study population, total, state, and local citations decreased post-GDL (17.8% vs. 8.1%, p<0.0001; 3.7% vs. 2.2%, p<0.0001; 14.1% vs. 5.8%, p<0.0001, respectively). In the control group, total and state citations did not change (26.7% vs. 23.9%, p=0.3606; 9.2% vs. 10.2%, p=0.3404, respectively), and local citations decreased (17.5% vs. 13.7%, p=0.0389). The rates of decrease per year for total, state, and local citations were significantly greater in the study population compared with control (p<0.0001, p=0.0002, p<0.0001, respectively). The 2007 GDL law in Massachusetts was associated with fewer traffic citations without a change in the rate of licenses issued to teenagers. These findings suggest that 2007 GDL may be improving driving habits as opposed to motivating teenagers to delay the issuing of licenses. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Alternatives to the impact factor.

PubMed

Oosthuizen, J C; Fenton, J E

2014-10-01

To explore alternative bibliometric markers to the well-established journal impact factor. The bibliometric evolution of a leading ENT journal over a six year period is discussed with critical analysis of a predetermined set of bibliometric alternatives to the journal impact factor. Retrospective review of the bibliometric performance of Clinical Otolaryngology over a six year period. The results of the study reveal that Clinical Otolaryngology has made steady bibliometric progress when the impact factor (IF) is considered with a gradual increase in impact factor from 1.098 in 2006 to a peak of 2.393 in 2011. Self-citation rates reported by the Journal Citation Report (JCR) demonstrated a significant decline during 2007 with a reported self-citation rate of 0%. The SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) database however recorded a self-citation rate of 67. Independent evaluation demonstrated a 56 self-citations during this period. The percentage of review articles published remained stable during the period in question. A lagged association between the number of review manuscripts and the IF failed to demonstrate any significant correlation (r = -0.19). Comparison between the IF and the Eigen factor (EF) as well as the SJR yielded negative correlation (r = -0.46) and (r = -0.35) respectively. The Article Influence score (AIS) and Source Normalised Impact per Paper (SNIP) were the only bibliometric alternatives to demonstrate a positive correlation when compared to the IF (r = 0.94) and (r = 0.66) respectively. The necessity of bibliometric markers cannot be called into question however the most widely employed of these, the journal impact factor has come under increased scrutiny of late. Despite some of the advantages offered by novel bibliometric markers, these do not necessarily compare favourably to the IF with regards to bibliometric performance. The only two markers to demonstrate a positive correlation when compared to the IF were the AI score and SNIP which would suggest that these are potential alternatives to the IF and have the added advantage that they are open access. Copyright © 2013 Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh (Scottish charity number SC005317) and Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Development of a Data Citations Database for an Interdisciplinary Data Center

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Chen, R. S.; Downs, R. R.; Schumacher, J.; Gerard, A.

2017-12-01

The scientific community has long depended on consistent citation of the scientific literature to enable traceability, support replication, and facilitate analysis and debate about scientific hypotheses, theories, assumptions, and conclusions. However, only in the past few years has the community focused on consistent citation of scientific data, e.g., through the application of Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) to data, the development of peer-reviewed data publications, community principles and guidelines, and other mechanisms. This means that, moving ahead, it should be easier to identify and track data citations and conduct systematic bibliometric studies. However, this still leaves the problem that many legacy datasets and past citations lack DOIs, making it difficult to develop a historical baseline or assess trends. With this in mind, the NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC) has developed a searchable citations database, containing more than 3,400 citations of SEDAC data and information products over the past 20 years. These citations were collected through various indices and search tools and in some cases through direct contacts with authors. The citations come from a range of natural, social, health, and engineering science journals, books, reports, and other media. The database can be used to find and extract citations filtered by a range of criteria, enabling quantitative analysis of trends, intercomparisons between data collections, and categorization of citations by type. We present a preliminary analysis of citations for selected SEDAC data collections, in order to establish a baseline and assess options for ongoing metrics to track the impact of SEDAC data on interdisciplinary science. We also present an analysis of the uptake of DOIs within data citations reported in published studies that used SEDAC data.

Journals Supporting Terrorism Research: Identification and Investigation into Their Impact on the Social Sciences

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bullis, Daryl R.; Irving, Richard D.

2013-01-01

A citation analysis of two preeminent terrorism journals ("Terrorism and Political Violence" and "Studies in Conflict and Terrorism") was used to identify 37 additional social science journals of significant importance to terrorism research. Citation data extracted from the "Web of Science" database was used to…

Australian Education Journals: Quantitative and Qualitative Indicators

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Haddow, Gaby; Genoni, Paul

2009-01-01

This paper reports on a study that applied citation-based measurements to Australian education journals. Citations data were drawn from two sources, Web of Science and Scopus, and these data were used to calculate each journal's impact factor, "h"-index, and diffusion factor. The rankings resulting from these analyses were compared with…

Universality of citation distributions: toward an objective measure of scientific impact.

PubMed

Radicchi, Filippo; Fortunato, Santo; Castellano, Claudio

2008-11-11

We study the distributions of citations received by a single publication within several disciplines, spanning broad areas of science. We show that the probability that an article is cited c times has large variations between different disciplines, but all distributions are rescaled on a universal curve when the relative indicator c(f) = c/c(0) is considered, where c(0) is the average number of citations per article for the discipline. In addition we show that the same universal behavior occurs when citation distributions of articles published in the same field, but in different years, are compared. These findings provide a strong validation of c(f) as an unbiased indicator for citation performance across disciplines and years. Based on this indicator, we introduce a generalization of the h index suitable for comparing scientists working in different fields.

Analysis of aggregate impact factor inflation in ophthalmology.

PubMed

Caramoy, Albert; Korwitz, Ulrich; Eppelin, Anita; Kirchhof, Bernd; Fauser, Sascha

2013-01-01

To analyze the aggregate impact factor (AIF) in ophthalmology, its inflation rate, and its relation to other subject fields. A retrospective, database review of all subject fields in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR), Science edition. Citation data, AIF, number of journals and citations from the years 2003-2011 were analyzed. Data were retrieved from JCR. Future trends were calculated using a linear regression method. The AIF varies considerably between subjects. It shows also an inflation rate, which varies annually. The AIF inflation rate in ophthalmology was not as high as the background AIF inflation rate. The AIF inflation rate caused the AIF to increase annually. Not considering these variations in the AIF between years and between fields will make the AIF as a bibliometric tool inappropriate. Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Maintaining Persistent Scholarship: The Case of University at Albany Dissertations

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Germain, Carol Anne

2012-01-01

Citation is a highly valued practice in the academic community. This mechanism supports an author's ideas, theories, and research; it acknowledges the scholarly contributions of others; and integrates academic works to enrich scholarly communication. Well-constructed citations, in addition to providing the appropriate bibliographic information…

Highly cited articles in wind tunnel-related research: a bibliometric analysis.

PubMed

Mo, Ziwei; Fu, Hui-Zhen; Ho, Yuh-Shan

2018-06-01

Wind tunnels have been widely employed in aerodynamic research. To characterize the high impact research, a bibliometric analysis was conducted on highly cited articles related to wind tunnel based on the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) database from 1900 to 2014. Articles with at least 100 citations from the Web of Science Core Collection were selected and analyzed in terms of publication years, authors, institutions, countries/territories, journals, Web of Science categories, and citation life cycles. The results show that a total of 77 highly cited articles in 37 journals were published between 1959 and 2008. Journal of Fluid Mechanics published the most of highly cited articles. The USA was the most productive country and most frequent partner of internationally collaboration. The prolific institutions were mainly located in the USA and UK. The authors who were both first author and corresponding author published 88% of the articles. The Y index was also deployed to evaluate the publication characteristics of authors. Moreover, the articles with high citations in both history and the latest year with their citation life cycles were examined to provide insights for high impact research. The highly cited articles were almost earliest wind tunnel experimental data and reports on their own research specialty, and thus attracted high citations. It was revealed that classic works of wind tunnel research was frequently occurred in 1990s but much less in 2000s, probably due to the development of numerical models of computational fluid dynamic (CFD) in recent decades.

Stress in nurses: The 100 top-cited papers published in nursing journals.

PubMed

Martín-Del-Río, Beatriz; Solanes-Puchol, Ángel; Martínez-Zaragoza, Fermín; Benavides-Gil, Gemma

2018-03-08

To identify and analyse the 100 most cited papers on stress in nurses published in nursing journals. The number of citations an article receives is an index of its impact on the scientific community. An analysis of the most cited articles on stress in nursing would allow us to identify the most important articles and to obtain information about this area of knowledge. A retrospective bibliometric analysis. In 2016, 111 journals belonging to the "nursing" category were identified in the Science and Social Science Citation Index. A search was performed of the Science Core Collection Website for articles on stress published in these journals. The topic, type of article, publishing journal, countries and institutions of origin and year of publication were extracted from the articles. The impact factor, immediacy index, journal country and publisher and h index were collected from the Institute for Scientific Information. The citation density, citation tendency and Bradford's law were calculated. They identified articles were mostly empirical quantitative studies with a transversal design, published from 1975 - 2011 in 23 journals. They were signed by 233 authors, most of whom are English-speaking from the USA and UK. The core distribution of the publications comprises a single journal, the Journal of Advanced Nursing. The study of stress in nursing has shown increased visibility and recognition each decade. The most recent articles have the highest number of citations, are the highest in rank and have the higher citation densities. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Determining the Publication Impact of a Digital Library

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kaplan, Nancy R.; Nelson, Michael L.

2000-01-01

We attempt to assess the publication impact of a digital library (DL) of aerospace scientific and technical information (STI). The Langley Technical Report Server (LTRS) is a digital library of over 1,400 electronic publications authored by NASA Langley Research Center personnel or contractors and has been available in its current World Wide Web (WWW) form since 1994. In this study, we examine calendar year 1997 usage statistics of LTRS and the Center for AeroSpace Information (CASI), a facility that archives and distributes hard copies of NASA and aerospace information. We also perform a citation analysis on some of the top publications distributed by LTRS. We find that although LTRS distributes over 71,000 copies of publications (compared with an estimated 24,000 copies from CASI), citation analysis indicates that LTRS has almost no measurable publication impact. We discuss the caveats of our investigation, speculate on possible different models of usage facilitated by DLs , and suggest retrieval analysis as a complementary metric to citation analysis. While our investigation failed to establish a relationship between LTRS and increased citations and raises at least as many questions as it answers, we hope it will serve as a invitation to, and guide for, further research in the use of DLs.

Is there a relationship between research sponsorship and publication impact? An analysis of funding acknowledgments in nanotechnology papers.

PubMed

Wang, Jue; Shapira, Philip

2015-01-01

This study analyzes funding acknowledgments in scientific papers to investigate relationships between research sponsorship and publication impacts. We identify acknowledgments to research sponsors for nanotechnology papers published in the Web of Science during a one-year sample period. We examine the citations accrued by these papers and the journal impact factors of their publication titles. The results show that publications from grant sponsored research exhibit higher impacts in terms of both journal ranking and citation counts than research that is not grant sponsored. We discuss the method and models used, and the insights provided by this approach as well as it limitations.

Is There a Relationship between Research Sponsorship and Publication Impact? An Analysis of Funding Acknowledgments in Nanotechnology Papers

PubMed Central

Wang, Jue; Shapira, Philip

2015-01-01

This study analyzes funding acknowledgments in scientific papers to investigate relationships between research sponsorship and publication impacts. We identify acknowledgments to research sponsors for nanotechnology papers published in the Web of Science during a one-year sample period. We examine the citations accrued by these papers and the journal impact factors of their publication titles. The results show that publications from grant sponsored research exhibit higher impacts in terms of both journal ranking and citation counts than research that is not grant sponsored. We discuss the method and models used, and the insights provided by this approach as well as it limitations. PMID:25695739

Adaptive wall wind tunnels: A selected, annotated bibliography

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Tuttle, M. H.; Mineck, R. E.

1986-01-01

This bibliography, with abstracts, consists of 257 citations arranged in chronological order. Selection of the citations was made for their value to researchers working to solve problems associated with reducing wall interference by the design, development, and operation of adaptive wall test sections. Author, source, and subject indexes are included.

Implementation of data citations and persistent identifiers at the ORNL DAAC

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Cook, Robert B.; Vannan, Suresh K. S.; McMurry, Benjamin F.

A requirement of data archives is that data holdings can be easily discovered, accessed, and used. One approach to improving data discovery and access is through data citations coupled with Digital Object Identifiers (DOI). The Oak Ridge National Laboratory Distributed Active Archive Center (ORNL DAAC) since 1998 has issued data citations that have been accepted and used in peer-reviewed journals. Citation elements established by the ORNL DAAC are similar to those used for journal articles (authors, year, product title, and information to locate), and beginning in 2007 included a DOI that is persistent, actionable, specific, and complete. The approach usedmore » at the ORNL DAAC also allows for referring to subsets of the data, by including within the citation the temporal and spatial extent, and parameters used. Data citations allow readers to find data and reproduce the results of the research article, and also use those data to test new hypotheses, design new sample collections, or construct or evaluate models. The ORNL DAAC uses a manual method to compile data citations and has developed a database that links research articles and their use of specific ORNL DAAC data products. Automation of the data citation compilation process, as is the case for articles, will enable data citations to become a more common practice. In addition to enhancing discovery and access of the data used in a research article, the citation gives credit to data generators, data centers and their funders, and, through citation indices, determine the scientific impact of a data set.« less

Implementation of data citations and persistent identifiers at the ORNL DAAC

DOE PAGES

Cook, Robert B.; Vannan, Suresh K. S.; McMurry, Benjamin F.; ...

2016-03-08

A requirement of data archives is that data holdings can be easily discovered, accessed, and used. One approach to improving data discovery and access is through data citations coupled with Digital Object Identifiers (DOI). The Oak Ridge National Laboratory Distributed Active Archive Center (ORNL DAAC) since 1998 has issued data citations that have been accepted and used in peer-reviewed journals. Citation elements established by the ORNL DAAC are similar to those used for journal articles (authors, year, product title, and information to locate), and beginning in 2007 included a DOI that is persistent, actionable, specific, and complete. The approach usedmore » at the ORNL DAAC also allows for referring to subsets of the data, by including within the citation the temporal and spatial extent, and parameters used. Data citations allow readers to find data and reproduce the results of the research article, and also use those data to test new hypotheses, design new sample collections, or construct or evaluate models. The ORNL DAAC uses a manual method to compile data citations and has developed a database that links research articles and their use of specific ORNL DAAC data products. Automation of the data citation compilation process, as is the case for articles, will enable data citations to become a more common practice. In addition to enhancing discovery and access of the data used in a research article, the citation gives credit to data generators, data centers and their funders, and, through citation indices, determine the scientific impact of a data set.« less

Exploring indicators of interdisciplinary research and education success

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Carr, Gemma; Blanch, Anicet; Blaschke, Alfred Paul; Brouwer, Roy; Bucher, Christian; Farnleitner, Andreas; Fürnkranz-Prskawetz, Alexia; Loucks, Daniel Pete; Morgenroth, Eberhard; Parajka, Juraj; Pfeifer, Norbert; Rechberger, Helmut; Wagner, Wolfgang; Zessner, Matthias; Blöschl, Günter

2017-04-01

Interdisciplinary research and education programmes aim to produce groundbreaking research, often on socially relevant topics, and to produce experts with the skills to work across disciplines. However, there are many outstanding questions on the effectiveness of interdisciplinary programmes. Such as whether they produce novel and groundbreaking research, whether interdisciplinary graduates are leading to a more interdisciplinary culture of research and practice in academia and beyond, and whether an interdisciplinary approach can more effectively address issues of societal relevance than a mono-disciplinary approach. The Vienna Doctoral Programme on Water Resource Systems at Vienna University of Technology is currently in its eighth year and offers a valuable case study to contribute to understanding interdisciplinary research and education. Ten different research fields are covered by the Programme and because collaborative research takes place both between researchers from different research fields (cross-disciplinary research) and from researchers from the same research field (mono-disciplinary research) we are able to compare the impacts of each research type. We specifically explored three questions: i) whether cross-disciplinary research leads to more innovative scientific findings than mono-disciplinary research, ii) whether cross-disciplinary researchers develop professional skills that benefit their future careers, and iii) whether cross-disciplinary research produces findings of greater societal relevance than mono-disciplinary research. To conduct the evaluation we identified a variety of indicators. Journal impact factors (IF) and citation rates of ISI indexed publications were used to compare scientific innovativeness. Based on these indicators, our findings suggest that cross-disciplinary work is more innovative. The cross-disciplinary work is published in journals with a slightly higher impact factor (mean IF is 2.36) and receives slightly more citations (mean number of citations per paper is 8) than mono-disciplinary work (mean IF is 2.09, mean number of citations per paper is 5). Graduate interdisciplinary skills were explored by categorising each graduate as either a cross-disciplinary or mono-disciplinary researcher based on their doctoral studies and comparing this to their post-doctoral work. Findings suggest that researchers who learn to work across the disciplines for their PhDs continue to work this way in their ongoing careers indicating that valuable skills have been acquired. To examine the societal relevance of the Programme's research the number of media engagements or policy impacts relating to research results were collated. Findings suggest that both cross-disciplinary and mono-disciplinary research address topics of societal value but researchers often expand their understanding of a societal interest topic by bringing in new research fields.

Factors influencing citations to systematic reviews in skin diseases: a cross-sectional study through Web of Sciences and Scopus.

PubMed

Manriquez, Juan; Cataldo, Karina; Harz, Isidora

2015-01-01

Disseminating information derived from systematic reviews is a fundamental step for translating evidence into practice. To determine which features of dermatological SR are associated with systematic review dissemination, using citation rates as an indicator. Dermatological systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2012 were obtained from Scopus, the ISI Web of Sciences and the Cochrane Skin Group. Bibliometric data of every systematic review were collected and analyzed. A total of 320 systematic reviews were analyzed. Univariable analysis showed that the journal impact factor, number of authors, and total references cited were positively associated with the number of citations. There was a significant difference in the median number of citations with regard to the corresponding author's country, type of skin disease, type of funding, and presence of international collaboration. Cochrane reviews were significantly associated with a lower number of citations. Multivariable analysis found that the number of authors, number of references cited and the corresponding author from United Kingdom were independently correlated with many citations. Cochrane systematic reviews tended to be independently associated with a lower number of citations. Citation number to systematic reviews may be improving by increasing the number of authors, especially collaborative authors, and the number of cited references. The reasons for the association of Cochrane SRs with fewer citations should be addressed in future studies.

Factors influencing citations to systematic reviews in skin diseases: a cross-sectional study through Web of Sciences and Scopus*

PubMed Central

Manriquez, Juan; Cataldo, Karina; Harz, Isidora

2015-01-01

BACKGROUND Disseminating information derived from systematic reviews is a fundamental step for translating evidence into practice. OBJECTIVE To determine which features of dermatological SR are associated with systematic review dissemination, using citation rates as an indicator. METHODS Dermatological systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2012 were obtained from Scopus, the ISI Web of Sciences and the Cochrane Skin Group. Bibliometric data of every systematic review were collected and analyzed. RESULTS A total of 320 systematic reviews were analyzed. Univariable analysis showed that the journal impact factor, number of authors, and total references cited were positively associated with the number of citations. There was a significant difference in the median number of citations with regard to the corresponding author's country, type of skin disease, type of funding, and presence of international collaboration. Cochrane reviews were significantly associated with a lower number of citations. Multivariable analysis found that the number of authors, number of references cited and the corresponding author from United Kingdom were independently correlated with many citations. Cochrane systematic reviews tended to be independently associated with a lower number of citations. CONCLUSIONS Citation number to systematic reviews may be improving by increasing the number of authors, especially collaborative authors, and the number of cited references. The reasons for the association of Cochrane SRs with fewer citations should be addressed in future studies. PMID:26560209

A Bibliometric Analysis of Communication Journals from 2002 to 2005

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Feeley, Thomas Hugh

2008-01-01

Journal impact ratings are often used by authors, promotion/hiring committees, and grant review teams as a proxy for scholarship quality. Journal citation data (2002-2005) from Social Sciences Citation Index were used to rank journals in the field of communication. A journal relatedness algorithm was applied to ascertain the 19 semantically…

AGU Publications Continue to Rank High in 2012 Journal Citation Reports

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Warner, Mary

2013-07-01

AGU journals continue to rank high in the 2012 Journal Citation Reports® (JCR), which was released by Thomson Reuters on 19 June. The impact factor of several AGU journals increased significantly, continuing their trend of the previous 5 years, while others remained consistent with the previous year's ranking.

Occupational Stress: A Comprehensive Review of the Top 50 Annual and Lifetime Cited Articles.

PubMed

Nowrouzi, Behdin; Nguyen, Christine; Casole, Jennifer; Nowrouzi-Kia, Behnam

2017-05-01

This study determined the impact and influence of published articles on the field of occupational stress. A transdisciplinary approach was used to identify the 50 work-related stress articles with the most lifetime citations and the 50 work-related stress articles with the highest annual citation rates. Studies were categorized based on their primary focus: (a) etiology, (b) predictor of outcome for which occupational stress is the outcome or predictor of outcome for which occupational stress is an independent variable, (c) management/intervention, (d) theory/model/framework, or (e) methodologies. The majority of studies with the highest number of lifetime citations as well as the highest annual citation rates used stress as a predictor or outcome of another factor. The proportion of studies that were categorized by etiology, intervention/management, theory/model/framework, or methodologies was relatively low for both lifetime and annual citations.

[Limiting a Medline/PubMed query to the "best" articles using the JCR relative impact factor].

PubMed

Avillach, P; Kerdelhué, G; Devos, P; Maisonneuve, H; Darmoni, S J

2014-12-01

Medline/PubMed is the most frequently used medical bibliographic research database. The aim of this study was to propose a new generic method to limit any Medline/PubMed query based on the relative impact factor and the A & B categories of the SIGAPS score. The entire PubMed corpus was used for the feasibility study, then ten frequent diseases in terms of PubMed indexing and the citations of four Nobel prize winners. The relative impact factor (RIF) was calculated by medical specialty defined in Journal Citation Reports. The two queries, which included all the journals in category A (or A OR B), were added to any Medline/PubMed query as a central point of the feasibility study. Limitation using the SIGAPS category A was larger than the when using the Core Clinical Journals (CCJ): 15.65% of PubMed corpus vs 8.64% for CCJ. The response time of this limit applied to the entire PubMed corpus was less than two seconds. For five diseases out of ten, limiting the citations with the RIF was more effective than with the CCJ. For the four Nobel prize winners, limiting the citations with the RIF was more effective than the CCJ. The feasibility study to apply a new filter based on the relative impact factor on any Medline/PubMed query was positive. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Effects of Print Publication Lag in Dual Format Journals on Scientometric Indicators

PubMed Central

Heneberg, Petr

2013-01-01

Background Publication lag between manuscript submission and its final publication is considered as an important factor affecting the decision to submit, the timeliness of presented data, and the scientometric measures of the particular journal. Dual-format peer-reviewed journals (publishing both print and online editions of their content) adopted a broadly accepted strategy to shorten the publication lag: to publish the accepted manuscripts online ahead of their print editions, which may follow days, but also years later. Effects of this widespread habit on the immediacy index (average number of times an article is cited in the year it is published) calculation were never analyzed. Methodology/Principal Findings Scopus database (which contains nearly up-to-date documents in press, but does not reveal citations by these documents until they are finalized) was searched for the journals with the highest total counts of articles in press, or highest counts of articles in press appearing online in 2010–2011. Number of citations received by the articles in press available online was found to be nearly equal to citations received within the year when the document was assigned to a journal issue. Thus, online publication of in press articles affects severely the calculation of immediacy index of their source titles, and disadvantages online-only and print-only journals when evaluating them according to the immediacy index and probably also according to the impact factor and similar measures. Conclusions/Significance Caution should be taken when evaluating dual-format journals supporting long publication lag. Further research should answer the question, on whether the immediacy index should be replaced by an indicator based on the date of first publication (online or in print, whichever comes first) to eliminate the problems analyzed in this report. Information value of immediacy index is further questioned by very high ratio of authors’ self-citations among the citation window used for its calculation. PMID:23573216

The Citation Wake of Publications Detects Nobel Laureates' Papers

PubMed Central

Klosik, David F.; Bornholdt, Stefan

2014-01-01

For several decades, a leading paradigm of how to quantitatively assess scientific research has been the analysis of the aggregated citation information in a set of scientific publications. Although the representation of this information as a citation network has already been coined in the 1960s, it needed the systematic indexing of scientific literature to allow for impact metrics that actually made use of this network as a whole, improving on the then prevailing metrics that were almost exclusively based on the number of direct citations. However, besides focusing on the assignment of credit, the paper citation network can also be studied in terms of the proliferation of scientific ideas. Here we introduce a simple measure based on the shortest-paths in the paper's in-component or, simply speaking, on the shape and size of the wake of a paper within the citation network. Applied to a citation network containing Physical Review publications from more than a century, our approach is able to detect seminal articles which have introduced concepts of obvious importance to the further development of physics. We observe a large fraction of papers co-authored by Nobel Prize laureates in physics among the top-ranked publications. PMID:25437855

The citation wake of publications detects nobel laureates' papers.

PubMed

Klosik, David F; Bornholdt, Stefan

2014-01-01

For several decades, a leading paradigm of how to quantitatively assess scientific research has been the analysis of the aggregated citation information in a set of scientific publications. Although the representation of this information as a citation network has already been coined in the 1960s, it needed the systematic indexing of scientific literature to allow for impact metrics that actually made use of this network as a whole, improving on the then prevailing metrics that were almost exclusively based on the number of direct citations. However, besides focusing on the assignment of credit, the paper citation network can also be studied in terms of the proliferation of scientific ideas. Here we introduce a simple measure based on the shortest-paths in the paper's in-component or, simply speaking, on the shape and size of the wake of a paper within the citation network. Applied to a citation network containing Physical Review publications from more than a century, our approach is able to detect seminal articles which have introduced concepts of obvious importance to the further development of physics. We observe a large fraction of papers co-authored by Nobel Prize laureates in physics among the top-ranked publications.

Science and Facebook: The same popularity law!

PubMed

Néda, Zoltán; Varga, Levente; Biró, Tamás S

2017-01-01

The distribution of scientific citations for publications selected with different rules (author, topic, institution, country, journal, etc…) collapse on a single curve if one plots the citations relative to their mean value. We find that the distribution of "shares" for the Facebook posts rescale in the same manner to the very same curve with scientific citations. This finding suggests that citations are subjected to the same growth mechanism with Facebook popularity measures, being influenced by a statistically similar social environment and selection mechanism. In a simple master-equation approach the exponential growth of the number of publications and a preferential selection mechanism leads to a Tsallis-Pareto distribution offering an excellent description for the observed statistics. Based on our model and on the data derived from PubMed we predict that according to the present trend the average citations per scientific publications exponentially relaxes to about 4.

Science and Facebook: The same popularity law!

PubMed Central

Varga, Levente; Biró, Tamás S.

2017-01-01

The distribution of scientific citations for publications selected with different rules (author, topic, institution, country, journal, etc…) collapse on a single curve if one plots the citations relative to their mean value. We find that the distribution of “shares” for the Facebook posts rescale in the same manner to the very same curve with scientific citations. This finding suggests that citations are subjected to the same growth mechanism with Facebook popularity measures, being influenced by a statistically similar social environment and selection mechanism. In a simple master-equation approach the exponential growth of the number of publications and a preferential selection mechanism leads to a Tsallis-Pareto distribution offering an excellent description for the observed statistics. Based on our model and on the data derived from PubMed we predict that according to the present trend the average citations per scientific publications exponentially relaxes to about 4. PMID:28678796

The Changing Functions of Citation: From Knowledge Networking to Academic Cash-Value

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Burbules, Nicholas C.

2015-01-01

This essay reviews the changing functions, and effects, of citation systems in scholarly research as they move from a range of uses primarily oriented around knowledge networking and epistemic validation, to their use as a set of metrics oriented around evaluating and rewarding certain kinds of academic performance (e.g. "impact…

The Top 50 Most Cited Articles in Cartilage Regeneration.

PubMed

Mc Donald, Ciaran K; Moriarty, Peter; Varzgalis, Manvydas; Murphy, Colin

2017-01-01

The aim of this study was to identify and analyze the top 50 most cited articles in cartilage regeneration. The impact of a scientific journal can be gauged by the total number of citations it has accrued. The top 50 most cited articles involving cartilage regeneration represent the most quoted level of evidence among this new subspecialty. This study aims to identify and analyze the 50 most cited articles in cartilage regeneration. The Web of Science™ citation indexing service was utilized to determine the most frequently cited articles published after 1956 containing "cartilage regeneration" in the "topic" or "title." The 50 most cited articles were included. The number of citations, year of publication, country of article origin, article institution, journal of publication, publication format, and authorship were then calculated for each article. The span of citations ranged from 1287 to 203 citations, with a mean of 361.02 citations per article in question. The articles originated from 11 countries, with the United States contributing 34 articles, followed by Japan with 5 articles. The articles were distributed across 34 high-impact journals. Biomaterials was the journal with the highest number of publications (seven articles) followed by the Journal of Orthopaedic Research (three articles). Of the 50 articles, 2 were clinical observational studies, 47 concerned basic science, and 1 was review article. The most cited articles involving cartilage regeneration are detected in both experimental and clinical research fields. The high ratio of basic science to clinical articles reflects the infancy of this relatively new specialty and that further clinical research is required in this area.

An analysis of the citation climate in neurosurgical literature and description of an interfield citation metric.

PubMed

Madhugiri, Venkatesh S; Sasidharan, Gopalakrishnan M; Subeikshanan, Venkatesan; Dutt, Akshat; Ambekar, Sudheer; Strom, Shane F

2015-05-01

The citation climate in neurosurgical literature is largely undefined. To study the patterns of citation of articles in neurosurgery as a scientific field and to evaluate the performance of neurosurgery journals vis-à-vis journals in other fields. References cited in articles published in neurosurgery journals during a specified time period were analyzed to determine the age of articles cited in neurosurgical literature. In the next analysis, articles published in neurosurgical journals were followed up for 13 years after publication. The postpublication citation patterns were analyzed to determine the time taken to reach the maximally cited state and the time when articles stopped being cited. The final part of the study dealt with the evolution of a new interfield citation metric, which was then compared with other standardized citation indexes. The mean ± SD age of articles cited in neurosurgical literature was 11.6 ± 11.7 years (median, 8 years). Citations received by articles gradually increased to a peak (at 6.25 years after publication in neurosurgery) and then reached a steady state; articles were still cited well into the late postpublication period. Neurosurgical articles published in nonneurosurgical high-impact journals were cited more highly than those in neurosurgical journals, although they took approximately the same time to reach the maximally cited state (7.2 years). The most cited pure neurosurgery journal was Neurosurgery. The citation climate for neurosurgery was adequately described. The interfield citation metric was able to ensure cross-field comparability of journal performance. G1, group 1G2, group 2G3, group 3G4, group 4IFCM, interfield citation metric.

The 100 most influential papers about cataract surgery: a bibliometric analysis.

PubMed

Lin, Ze-Nan; Chen, Jie; Zhang, Qi; Li, Qian; Cai, Min-Yun; Yang, Hai; Cui, Hong-Ping

2017-01-01

To identify the 100 most cited papers in cataract surgery, we performed a comprehensive bibliometric analysis basing on the literature search on the Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge. The number of citations, including the total citations, latest 5y citations and average citation number per year (ACY), authorship, year of publication, major topics, journal of publication, country and institution of origin of each paper were recorded and then analyzed. Pearson's correlation analysis was conducted to evaluate the correlation between the published year and the number of citations. The correlation between journal's impact factor (IF) and number of citations was assessed as well. The most cited paper was the classic paper done by the European Society of Cataract & Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS) group. This paper focused on the topic of endophthalmitis. Not only the most cited papers originated from the USA, but also some American institutions like Johns Hopkins University, Harvard Medical School, etc. had the most citations. Pearson's correlation analysis indicated that the latest 5y citations and ACY were significantly related with the published year (5y citations: r =0.615, P <0.001; ACY: r =0.657, P <0.001), whereas no association between the total number of citations and published year was found ( r =0.045). Moreover, the IFs of journals were found to have no significant effect on the number of total citations. To our knowledge, this is the first study on the most influential papers in cataract surgery after a comprehensive research of relevant literatures. The present work may provide us concise information concerning the development history of cataract surgery over the past 66y.

The 100 most influential papers about cataract surgery: a bibliometric analysis

PubMed Central

Lin, Ze-Nan; Chen, Jie; Zhang, Qi; Li, Qian; Cai, Min-Yun; Yang, Hai; Cui, Hong-Ping

2017-01-01

AIM To identify the 100 most cited papers in cataract surgery, we performed a comprehensive bibliometric analysis basing on the literature search on the Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge. METHODS The number of citations, including the total citations, latest 5y citations and average citation number per year (ACY), authorship, year of publication, major topics, journal of publication, country and institution of origin of each paper were recorded and then analyzed. Pearson's correlation analysis was conducted to evaluate the correlation between the published year and the number of citations. The correlation between journal's impact factor (IF) and number of citations was assessed as well. RESULTS The most cited paper was the classic paper done by the European Society of Cataract & Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS) group. This paper focused on the topic of endophthalmitis. Not only the most cited papers originated from the USA, but also some American institutions like Johns Hopkins University, Harvard Medical School, etc. had the most citations. Pearson's correlation analysis indicated that the latest 5y citations and ACY were significantly related with the published year (5y citations: r=0.615, P<0.001; ACY: r=0.657, P<0.001), whereas no association between the total number of citations and published year was found (r=0.045). Moreover, the IFs of journals were found to have no significant effect on the number of total citations. CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the first study on the most influential papers in cataract surgery after a comprehensive research of relevant literatures. The present work may provide us concise information concerning the development history of cataract surgery over the past 66y. PMID:29062780

Cyber-Bullying in School Settings: A Research Citation Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Piotrowski, Chris

2011-01-01

Research on the topic of cyber-bullying has proliferated over the past decade, particularly on its impact on school-aged children. Thus, it would be of interest to examine the scope and extent of research interest in the topic in scholarly publications. This paper reports on a reference citation analysis of the database PsycINFO, using…

Progressive Trends and Impact of the Journal of Career Development: A Citation Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Chaichanasakul, Adipat; He, Yuhong; Chen, Hsui-Hui; Allen, G. E. Kawika; Khairallah, Taleb S.; Ramos, Karina

2011-01-01

As one of the four premier journals in vocational psychology, the "Journal of Career Development" ("JCD") has published over 830 articles over the past three decades. This study examined the performance of "JCD" through a citation analysis and provided evaluative data for scholars publishing in the field of vocation psychology. Articles published…

The association between four citation metrics and peer rankings of research influence of Australian researchers in six fields of public health.

PubMed

Derrick, Gemma Elizabeth; Haynes, Abby; Chapman, Simon; Hall, Wayne D

2011-04-06

Doubt about the relevance, appropriateness and transparency of peer review has promoted the use of citation metrics as a viable adjunct or alternative in the assessment of research impact. It is also commonly acknowledged that research metrics will not replace peer review unless they are shown to correspond with the assessment of peers. This paper evaluates the relationship between researchers' influence as evaluated by their peers and various citation metrics representing different aspects of research output in 6 fields of public health in Australia. For four fields, the results showed a modest positive correlation between different research metrics and peer assessments of research influence. However, for two fields, tobacco and injury, negative or no correlations were found. This suggests a peer understanding of research influence within these fields differed from visibility in the mainstream, peer-reviewed scientific literature. This research therefore recommends the use of both peer review and metrics in a combined approach in assessing research influence. Future research evaluation frameworks intent on incorporating metrics should first analyse each field closely to determine what measures of research influence are valued highly by members of that research community. This will aid the development of comprehensive and relevant frameworks with which to fairly and transparently distribute research funds or approve promotion applications.

The Association between Four Citation Metrics and Peer Rankings of Research Influence of Australian Researchers in Six Fields of Public Health

PubMed Central

Derrick, Gemma Elizabeth; Haynes, Abby; Chapman, Simon; Hall, Wayne D.

2011-01-01

Doubt about the relevance, appropriateness and transparency of peer review has promoted the use of citation metrics as a viable adjunct or alternative in the assessment of research impact. It is also commonly acknowledged that research metrics will not replace peer review unless they are shown to correspond with the assessment of peers. This paper evaluates the relationship between researchers' influence as evaluated by their peers and various citation metrics representing different aspects of research output in 6 fields of public health in Australia. For four fields, the results showed a modest positive correlation between different research metrics and peer assessments of research influence. However, for two fields, tobacco and injury, negative or no correlations were found. This suggests a peer understanding of research influence within these fields differed from visibility in the mainstream, peer-reviewed scientific literature. This research therefore recommends the use of both peer review and metrics in a combined approach in assessing research influence. Future research evaluation frameworks intent on incorporating metrics should first analyse each field closely to determine what measures of research influence are valued highly by members of that research community. This will aid the development of comprehensive and relevant frameworks with which to fairly and transparently distribute research funds or approve promotion applications. PMID:21494691

The relationship between manuscript title structure and success: editorial decisions and citation performance for an ecological journal

PubMed Central

Fox, Charles W; Burns, C Sean

2015-01-01

A poorly chosen article title may make a paper difficult to discover or discourage readership when discovered, reducing an article's impact. Yet, it is unclear how the structure of a manuscript's title influences readership and impact. We used manuscript tracking data for all manuscripts submitted to the journal Functional Ecology from 2004 to 2013 and citation data for papers published in this journal from 1987 to 2011 to examine how title features changed and whether a manuscript's title structure was predictive of success during the manuscript review process and/or impact (citation) after publication. Titles of manuscripts submitted to Functional Ecology became marginally longer (after controlling for other variables), broader in focus (less frequent inclusion of genus and species names), and included more humor and subtitles over the period of the study. Papers with subtitles were less likely to be rejected by editors both pre- and post-peer review, although both effects were small and the presence of subtitles in published papers was not predictive of citations. Papers with specific names of study organisms in their titles fared poorly during editorial (but not peer) review and, if published, were less well cited than papers whose titles did not include specific names. Papers with intermediate length titles were more successful during editorial review, although the effect was small and title word count was not predictive of citations. No features of titles were predictive of reviewer willingness to review papers or the length of time a paper was in peer review. We conclude that titles have changed in structure over time, but features of title structure have only small or no relationship with success during editorial review and post-publication impact. The title feature that was most predictive of manuscript success: papers whose titles emphasize broader conceptual or comparative issues fare better both pre- and post-publication than do papers with organism-specific titles. PMID:26045949

The relationship between manuscript title structure and success: editorial decisions and citation performance for an ecological journal.

PubMed

Fox, Charles W; Burns, C Sean

2015-05-01

A poorly chosen article title may make a paper difficult to discover or discourage readership when discovered, reducing an article's impact. Yet, it is unclear how the structure of a manuscript's title influences readership and impact. We used manuscript tracking data for all manuscripts submitted to the journal Functional Ecology from 2004 to 2013 and citation data for papers published in this journal from 1987 to 2011 to examine how title features changed and whether a manuscript's title structure was predictive of success during the manuscript review process and/or impact (citation) after publication. Titles of manuscripts submitted to Functional Ecology became marginally longer (after controlling for other variables), broader in focus (less frequent inclusion of genus and species names), and included more humor and subtitles over the period of the study. Papers with subtitles were less likely to be rejected by editors both pre- and post-peer review, although both effects were small and the presence of subtitles in published papers was not predictive of citations. Papers with specific names of study organisms in their titles fared poorly during editorial (but not peer) review and, if published, were less well cited than papers whose titles did not include specific names. Papers with intermediate length titles were more successful during editorial review, although the effect was small and title word count was not predictive of citations. No features of titles were predictive of reviewer willingness to review papers or the length of time a paper was in peer review. We conclude that titles have changed in structure over time, but features of title structure have only small or no relationship with success during editorial review and post-publication impact. The title feature that was most predictive of manuscript success: papers whose titles emphasize broader conceptual or comparative issues fare better both pre- and post-publication than do papers with organism-specific titles.

Mapping of Indian neuroscience research: a scientometric analysis of research output during 1999-2008.

PubMed

Bala, Adarsh; Gupta, B M

2010-01-01

This study analyses the research output in India in neurosciences during the period 1999-2008 and the analyses included research growth, rank, global publications' share, citation impact, share of international collaborative papers and major collaborative partner countries and patterns of research communication in most productive journals. It also analyses the characteristics of most productive institutions, authors and high-cited papers. The publication output and impact of India is also compared with China, Brazil and South Korea. Scopus Citation database was used for retrieving the publications' output of India and other countries in neurosciences during 1999-2008. India's global publications' share in neurosciences during the study period was 0.99% (with 4503 papers) and it ranked 21 st among the top 26 countries in neurosciences. The average annual publication growth rate was 11.37%, shared 17.34% of international collaborative papers and the average citation per paper was 4.21. India was far behind China, Brazil and South Korea in terms of publication output, citation quality and share of international collaborative papers in neurosciences. India is far behind in terms of publication output, citation quality and share of international collaborative papers in neurosciences when compared to other countries with an emerging economy. There is an urgent need to substantially increase the research activities in the field of neurosciences in India.

Impact factor of Korean Journal of Pediatrics on Korean Medical Citation Index and Science Citation Index of Web of Science

PubMed Central

Choi, Sun Hee; Han, Man Yong; Rha, Yeong Ho; Lee, Young Jin

2011-01-01

Purpose The total number of times a paper is cited, also known as the impact factor (IF) of a medical journal, is widely implied in evaluating the quality of a research paper. We evaluated the citation index data as an IF of Korean J Pediatr in Korean Medical Citation Index (KoMCI) and JCI of Web of Science. Methods We calculated the IF of Korean J Pediatr at KoMCI supervised by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. And we estimated the IF of Korean J Pediatr by the JCI of Web of Science although it was never officially reported. Results The IF of Korean J Pediatr on KoMCI has increased from 0.100 in the year 2000, to 0.205 in 2008, and 0.326 in 2009. Although the IF of Korean J Pediatr was 0.006 in 2005, 0.018 in 2006, 0.028 in 2008, 0.066 in 2009, and 0.018 in 2010 according to the JCI of Web of Science, the number of citations are steadily increasing. Conclusion Understanding and realizing the current status will be a stepping stone for further improvement. The next objective of the Korean J Pediatr is to become registered in the SCI or SCIE. Increasing the IF according to the JCI of Web of Science is crucial in order to achieve this goal. PMID:21738548

Impact factor of Korean Journal of Pediatrics on Korean Medical Citation Index and Science Citation Index of Web of Science.

PubMed

Bae, Chong Woo; Choi, Sun Hee; Han, Man Yong; Rha, Yeong Ho; Lee, Young Jin

2011-04-01

The total number of times a paper is cited, also known as the impact factor (IF) of a medical journal, is widely implied in evaluating the quality of a research paper. We evaluated the citation index data as an IF of Korean J Pediatr in Korean Medical Citation Index (KoMCI) and JCI of Web of Science. We calculated the IF of Korean J Pediatr at KoMCI supervised by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. And we estimated the IF of Korean J Pediatr by the JCI of Web of Science although it was never officially reported. The IF of Korean J Pediatr on KoMCI has increased from 0.100 in the year 2000, to 0.205 in 2008, and 0.326 in 2009. Although the IF of Korean J Pediatr was 0.006 in 2005, 0.018 in 2006, 0.028 in 2008, 0.066 in 2009, and 0.018 in 2010 according to the JCI of Web of Science, the number of citations are steadily increasing. Understanding and realizing the current status will be a stepping stone for further improvement. The next objective of the Korean J Pediatr is to become registered in the SCI or SCIE. Increasing the IF according to the JCI of Web of Science is crucial in order to achieve this goal.

The health impact of trade and investment agreements: a quantitative systematic review and network co-citation analysis.

PubMed

Barlow, Pepita; McKee, Martin; Basu, Sanjay; Stuckler, David

2017-03-08

Regional trade agreements are major international policy instruments that shape macro-economic and political systems. There is widespread debate as to whether and how these agreements pose risks to public health. Here we perform a comprehensive systematic review of quantitative studies of the health impact of trade and investment agreements. We identified studies from searches in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Global Health Online. Research articles were eligible for inclusion if they were quantitative studies of the health impacts of trade and investment agreements or policy. We systematically reviewed study findings, evaluated quality using the Quality Assessment Tool from the Effective Public Health Practice Project, and performed network citation analysis to study disciplinary siloes. Seventeen quantitative studies met our inclusion criteria. There was consistent evidence that implementing trade agreements was associated with increased consumption of processed foods and sugar-sweetened beverages. Granting import licenses for patented drugs was associated with increased access to pharmaceuticals. Implementing trade agreements and associated policies was also correlated with higher cardiovascular disease incidence and higher Body Mass Index (BMI), whilst correlations with tobacco consumption, under-five mortality, maternal mortality, and life expectancy were inconclusive. Overall, the quality of studies is weak or moderately weak, and co-citation analysis revealed a relative isolation of public health from economics. We identified limitations in existing studies which preclude definitive conclusions of the health impacts of regional trade and investment agreements. Few address unobserved confounding, and many possible consequences and mechanisms linking trade and investment agreements to health remain poorly understood. Results from our co-citation analysis suggest scope for greater interdisciplinary collaboration. Notwithstanding these limitations, our results find evidence that trade agreements pose some significant health risks. Health protections in trade and investment treaties may mitigate these impacts.

A Journal-Level Analysis of Progress in Transplantation.

PubMed

Feeley, Thomas; Lee, Seyoung; Moon, Shin-Il

2018-03-01

Citations to articles published in academic journals represent a proxy for influence in bibliometrics. To measure the journal impact factor for Progress in Transplantation over time and to also identify related journals indexed in transplantation and surgery. Data from Journal Citation Reports (ISI web of science) were used to rank Progress in Transplantation compared to peer journals using journal impact and journal relatedness measures. Social network analysis was used to measure relationships between pairs of journals in Progress in Transplantation's relatedness network. Journal impact factor and journal relatedness. Data from 2010 through 2015 indicate the average journal article in PIT was cited 0.87 times (standard deviation [SD] = 0.12) and this estimate was stable over time. Progress in Transplantation most often cited American Journal of Transplantation, Transplantation, American Journal of Kidney Diseases, and Liver Transplantation. In terms of cited data, the journal was most often referenced by Clinical Transplantation, Transplant International, and Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation. The journal is listed both in surgery and transplantation categories of Journal Citation Reports and its impact factors over time fare better with surgery journals than with transplant journals. Network data using betweenness centrality indicate Progress in Transplantation links transplantation-focused journals and journals indexed in health sciences categories.

Scientific production and bibliometric impact of a representative group of Spanish internists with established research careers.

PubMed

Burbano Santos, P; Miró, Ò; Martín-Sánchez, F J; Fernández Pérez, C; Casademont, J

2015-10-01

To study the temporal evolution of the bibliometric indices of internists with established research experience in order to predict the future behavior of researchers and to assess whether output focused on a specific area of internal medicine helps obtain greater visibility than in general internal medicine. We analyzed a representative group of members of the Spanish Society of Internal Medicine (SEMI) based on data obtained from the Web of Science. As an indicator of productivity, we analyzed the number of articles published. As impact indicators, we studied the impact factor (IF), the number of citations and the h-index. We analyzed 42 internists, with a mean experience of 30 years and a total of 6655 publications. The mean (SD) number of studies was 158 (96), the number of citations was 2,850 (2,865), the IF was 711 (549) and the h-index was 25 (11). These figures were higher for the specialist internists than for the general internists. There was a good relationship between the impact and productivity indicators (R(2)=.61-.89) and a poor relationship between these indicators and the years of experience (R(2)=.13-.19). The temporal evolution of these indicators for each individual researcher and for all researchers as a whole was adjusted to a second-degree polynomial model, with the h-index having the highest R(2) values. The h-index is the factor that had the best adjustment and least variability and could therefore help predict the future scientific output and impact of internists. The specialist researchers achieved greater visibility than the general internists. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier España, S.L.U. y Sociedad Española de Medicina Interna (SEMI). All rights reserved.

The Distribution of the Asymptotic Number of Citations to Sets of Publications by a Researcher or from an Academic Department Are Consistent with a Discrete Lognormal Model.

PubMed

Moreira, João A G; Zeng, Xiao Han T; Amaral, Luís A Nunes

2015-01-01

How to quantify the impact of a researcher's or an institution's body of work is a matter of increasing importance to scientists, funding agencies, and hiring committees. The use of bibliometric indicators, such as the h-index or the Journal Impact Factor, have become widespread despite their known limitations. We argue that most existing bibliometric indicators are inconsistent, biased, and, worst of all, susceptible to manipulation. Here, we pursue a principled approach to the development of an indicator to quantify the scientific impact of both individual researchers and research institutions grounded on the functional form of the distribution of the asymptotic number of citations. We validate our approach using the publication records of 1,283 researchers from seven scientific and engineering disciplines and the chemistry departments at the 106 U.S. research institutions classified as "very high research activity". Our approach has three distinct advantages. First, it accurately captures the overall scientific impact of researchers at all career stages, as measured by asymptotic citation counts. Second, unlike other measures, our indicator is resistant to manipulation and rewards publication quality over quantity. Third, our approach captures the time-evolution of the scientific impact of research institutions.

The Distribution of the Asymptotic Number of Citations to Sets of Publications by a Researcher or from an Academic Department Are Consistent with a Discrete Lognormal Model

PubMed Central

Moreira, João A. G.; Zeng, Xiao Han T.; Amaral, Luís A. Nunes

2015-01-01

How to quantify the impact of a researcher’s or an institution’s body of work is a matter of increasing importance to scientists, funding agencies, and hiring committees. The use of bibliometric indicators, such as the h-index or the Journal Impact Factor, have become widespread despite their known limitations. We argue that most existing bibliometric indicators are inconsistent, biased, and, worst of all, susceptible to manipulation. Here, we pursue a principled approach to the development of an indicator to quantify the scientific impact of both individual researchers and research institutions grounded on the functional form of the distribution of the asymptotic number of citations. We validate our approach using the publication records of 1,283 researchers from seven scientific and engineering disciplines and the chemistry departments at the 106 U.S. research institutions classified as “very high research activity”. Our approach has three distinct advantages. First, it accurately captures the overall scientific impact of researchers at all career stages, as measured by asymptotic citation counts. Second, unlike other measures, our indicator is resistant to manipulation and rewards publication quality over quantity. Third, our approach captures the time-evolution of the scientific impact of research institutions. PMID:26571133

Citing a Data Repository: A Case Study of the Protein Data Bank

PubMed Central

Huang, Yi-Hung; Rose, Peter W.; Hsu, Chun-Nan

2015-01-01

The Protein Data Bank (PDB) is the worldwide repository of 3D structures of proteins, nucleic acids and complex assemblies. The PDB’s large corpus of data (> 100,000 structures) and related citations provide a well-organized and extensive test set for developing and understanding data citation and access metrics. In this paper, we present a systematic investigation of how authors cite PDB as a data repository. We describe a novel metric based on information cascade constructed by exploring the citation network to measure influence between competing works and apply that to analyze different data citation practices to PDB. Based on this new metric, we found that the original publication of RCSB PDB in the year 2000 continues to attract most citations though many follow-up updates were published. None of these follow-up publications by members of the wwPDB organization can compete with the original publication in terms of citations and influence. Meanwhile, authors increasingly choose to use URLs of PDB in the text instead of citing PDB papers, leading to disruption of the growth of the literature citations. A comparison of data usage statistics and paper citations shows that PDB Web access is highly correlated with URL mentions in the text. The results reveal the trend of how authors cite a biomedical data repository and may provide useful insight of how to measure the impact of a data repository. PMID:26317409

Citing a Data Repository: A Case Study of the Protein Data Bank.

PubMed

Huang, Yi-Hung; Rose, Peter W; Hsu, Chun-Nan

2015-01-01

The Protein Data Bank (PDB) is the worldwide repository of 3D structures of proteins, nucleic acids and complex assemblies. The PDB's large corpus of data (> 100,000 structures) and related citations provide a well-organized and extensive test set for developing and understanding data citation and access metrics. In this paper, we present a systematic investigation of how authors cite PDB as a data repository. We describe a novel metric based on information cascade constructed by exploring the citation network to measure influence between competing works and apply that to analyze different data citation practices to PDB. Based on this new metric, we found that the original publication of RCSB PDB in the year 2000 continues to attract most citations though many follow-up updates were published. None of these follow-up publications by members of the wwPDB organization can compete with the original publication in terms of citations and influence. Meanwhile, authors increasingly choose to use URLs of PDB in the text instead of citing PDB papers, leading to disruption of the growth of the literature citations. A comparison of data usage statistics and paper citations shows that PDB Web access is highly correlated with URL mentions in the text. The results reveal the trend of how authors cite a biomedical data repository and may provide useful insight of how to measure the impact of a data repository.

Database trial impact on graduate nursing comprehensive exams

PubMed Central

Pionke, Katharine; Huckstadt, Alicia

2015-01-01

While the authors were doing a test period of databases, the question of whether or not databases affect outcomes of graduate nursing comprehensive examinations came up. This study explored that question through using citation analysis of exams that were taken during a database trial and exams that were not. The findings showed no difference in examination pass/fail rates. While the pass/fail rates did not change, a great deal was learned in terms of citation accuracy and types of materials that students used, leading to discussions about changing how citation and plagiarism awareness were taught. PMID:26512218

[Productivity, visibility and citation analysis of the Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública, 2002-2009].

PubMed

Huamaní, Charles

2010-09-01

Biomedical journals are the most used and important venue to disseminate and interchange scientific information, and evaluation is an important component. A bibliometric study was conducted on the productivity, visibility and citation analysis of the Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública (RPMESP), from 2002 to 2009. During this period, the RPMESP published about 62 documents per year, 55.3% were research articles. The visibility of RPMESP, determined among three databases (SISBIB-UNMSM, SciELO-Peru, and REDALYC), was irregular, increasing on July 2006, with the highest access on October 2009 (117,618 hits). 43.0% of publications were cited. The calculated impact factor in ISI journals was 0.04 in 2009. In conclusion, the citation of RPMESP shows a slowly growing during the period 2002-2009. It is hoped that the RPMESP increase its visibility and impact after its inclusion in MEDLINE.

[Impact of the inclusion of articles written in English in multilingual Spanish biomedical journals].

PubMed

Cremades Pallas, R; Burbano, P; Valcárcel de la Iglesia, M A; Burillo-Putze, G; Martín-Sánchez, F J; Miró, Ò

2013-01-01

To analyze the impact of articles published in English compared to those published in Spanish in multilingual Spanish biomedical journals. We analyzed the language of publication, the number of original articles, the nationality of the authors, the citations received, the citing article and the nationality of the citing authors among the articles published from 2008-2012 in 5 multilingual Spanish biomedical journals. The study included 4,296 documents, 85 of which were published in English (2%). The percentage of original articles and of non-Spanish authorship was significantly higher among these latter articles and they also achieved more citations and more citing articles per article published. The proportion of articles published in English by multilingual Spanish biomedical journals is low and they are more often originals signed exclusively by foreign authors and receive more citations than those published in Spanish, which are also more frequently made by foreign authors.

Is bilingualism losing its advantage? A bibliometric approach

PubMed Central

López-Penadés, Raúl; Buil-Legaz, Lucía; Aguilar-Mediavilla, Eva; Adrover-Roig, Daniel

2017-01-01

This study uses several bibliometric indices to explore the temporal course of publication trends regarding the bilingual advantage in executive control over a ten-year window. These indices include the number of published papers, numbers of citations, and the journal impact factor. According to the information available in their abstracts, studies were classified into one of four categories: supporting, ambiguous towards, not mentioning, or challenging the bilingual advantage. Results show that the number of papers challenging the bilingual advantage increased notably in 2014 and 2015. Both the average impact factor and the accumulated citations as of June 2016 were equivalent between categories. However, of the studies published in 2014, those that challenge the bilingual advantage accumulated more citations in June 2016 than those supporting it. Our findings offer evidence-based bibliometric information about the current state of the literature and suggest a change in publication trends regarding the literature on the bilingual advantage. PMID:28426797

Patterns of database citation in articles and patents indicate long-term scientific and industry value of biological data resources.

PubMed

Bousfield, David; McEntyre, Johanna; Velankar, Sameer; Papadatos, George; Bateman, Alex; Cochrane, Guy; Kim, Jee-Hyub; Graef, Florian; Vartak, Vid; Alako, Blaise; Blomberg, Niklas

2016-01-01

Data from open access biomolecular data resources, such as the European Nucleotide Archive and the Protein Data Bank are extensively reused within life science research for comparative studies, method development and to derive new scientific insights. Indicators that estimate the extent and utility of such secondary use of research data need to reflect this complex and highly variable data usage. By linking open access scientific literature, via Europe PubMedCentral, to the metadata in biological data resources we separate data citations associated with a deposition statement from citations that capture the subsequent, long-term, reuse of data in academia and industry.  We extend this analysis to begin to investigate citations of biomolecular resources in patent documents. We find citations in more than 8,000 patents from 2014, demonstrating substantial use and an important role for data resources in defining biological concepts in granted patents to both academic and industrial innovators. Combined together our results indicate that the citation patterns in biomedical literature and patents vary, not only due to citation practice but also according to the data resource cited. The results guard against the use of simple metrics such as citation counts and show that indicators of data use must not only take into account citations within the biomedical literature but also include reuse of data in industry and other parts of society by including patents and other scientific and technical documents such as guidelines, reports and grant applications.

Patterns of database citation in articles and patents indicate long-term scientific and industry value of biological data resources

PubMed Central

Bousfield, David; McEntyre, Johanna; Velankar, Sameer; Papadatos, George; Bateman, Alex; Cochrane, Guy; Kim, Jee-Hyub; Graef, Florian; Vartak, Vid; Alako, Blaise; Blomberg, Niklas

2016-01-01

Data from open access biomolecular data resources, such as the European Nucleotide Archive and the Protein Data Bank are extensively reused within life science research for comparative studies, method development and to derive new scientific insights. Indicators that estimate the extent and utility of such secondary use of research data need to reflect this complex and highly variable data usage. By linking open access scientific literature, via Europe PubMedCentral, to the metadata in biological data resources we separate data citations associated with a deposition statement from citations that capture the subsequent, long-term, reuse of data in academia and industry.  We extend this analysis to begin to investigate citations of biomolecular resources in patent documents. We find citations in more than 8,000 patents from 2014, demonstrating substantial use and an important role for data resources in defining biological concepts in granted patents to both academic and industrial innovators. Combined together our results indicate that the citation patterns in biomedical literature and patents vary, not only due to citation practice but also according to the data resource cited. The results guard against the use of simple metrics such as citation counts and show that indicators of data use must not only take into account citations within the biomedical literature but also include reuse of data in industry and other parts of society by including patents and other scientific and technical documents such as guidelines, reports and grant applications. PMID:27092246

Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery's Evolution into an International Journal Based on Journal Metrics.

PubMed

Huh, Sun

2016-06-01

This article is aimed at providing evidence of increased international recognition of Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery (CiOS) based on journal metrics. Since 7 years have passed since its launch in 2009, it is time to reflect on the journal's efforts to be recognized as a top-notch journal. The following journal metrics were analyzed from the journal's homepage and Web of Science Core Collection database: number of citable and noncitable articles; number of original articles supported by grants; editorial board members' countries; authors' countries; citing authors' countries; source titles of citing articles; impact factor; total citations; comparison of impact factor with 3 Science Citation Index Expanded journals; and Hirsch index (H-index). Of the total 392 articles, 378 were citable articles (96.4%). Of the total 282 original articles, 52 (18.4%) were supported by research grants. The editorial board members were from 13 countries. Authors were from 20 countries. The number of countries of citing authors was 66. The number of source titles of citing articles was more than 100. The total citations of CiOS have increased from 0 in 2009 to 374 in 2015. The impact factors without self-citations of CiOS were the greatest among 4 Asian journals in 2013 and 2014. The 2015 impact factor was calculated as 0.79 in January 2016. The H-index was 13. CiOS can be considered to have reached the level of top-notch journal in the orthopedic field based on journal metrics. The inclusion of the journal in PubMed Central appears to have increased international relevance of the journal.

Similarity Measures in Scientometric Research: The Jaccard Index versus Salton's Cosine Formula.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hamers, Lieve; And Others

1989-01-01

Describes two similarity measures used in citation and co-citation analysis--the Jaccard index and Salton's cosine formula--and investigates the relationship between the two measures. It is shown that Salton's formula yields a numerical value that is twice Jaccard's index in most cases, and an explanation is offered. (13 references) (CLB)

[Analysis of highly cited articles published in Emergencias].

PubMed

Miró, Òscar; Fernández-Guerrero, Inés María; Burillo-Putze, Guillermo; Martín-Sánchez, Francisco Javier

2015-01-01

A journal is generally considered to be of higher quality to the extent that it publishes articles that are cited. A journal's articles are not all cited equally, however; rather, citations of only a select group of titles accounts for most of a journal's impact factor. This study aimed to identify the characteristics of Emergencias's most highly cited articles and compare their impact to that of papers by other authors in Spain, in Spanish, and internationally in the field of emergency medicine. Between 2008 and 2015, Emergencias published 975 articles, which received 2207 citations. The most-cited article received 52, and the group of 20 most-cited articles accumulated a total of 519 cites (23.5%). Even though Emergencias is published in Spanish and was included in Journal Citation Reports only recently (2008), some of the published articles have had considerable impact. The most-cited article (EVADUR Study) was in the top 2% (98th percentile) of all publications by authors in Spain, and in the top 1% of articles published in Spanish or in emergency medicine.

National bias in citations in urology journals: parochialism or availability?

PubMed

Grange, R I

1999-10-01

To determine any bias by authors of different nationalities in their citation rate of selected urological journals in papers published in the British Journal of Urology and the Journal of Urology. Using a simple computer program and text files of accepted reports in the BJU, or those available on CD-ROM from J Urol, 212 recent papers in the BJU and 111 from J Urol were analysed to determine the number of citations to four major urological journals (BJU, J Urol, Eur Urol and Urology). The frequencies of citations to these journals were then compared with the national origin of the author(s), grouped as UK, Europe, North America and Other. In both the BJU and J Urol the citation rates of the selected journals differed significantly among authors from different regions. In BJU papers, the citation rate of the BJU was highest by UK authors and their citation rate of J Urol was amongst the lowest of the rates for J Urol. The highest citation rate for J Urol was that by European authors. American authors cited the BJU least, citing the J Urol about five times more often than they cited the BJU. Of the papers in the J Urol sample, over 60% were from American authors, with only four from UK authors; thus the UK group was not analysed separately but included in the European group. The mean citation rate of J Urol was highest in papers by American authors, at about 14 times that for citations to the BJU. The citation rates for the other two journals were not significantly different with nationality or journal, but were generally much lower in J Urol than in the BJU. There are significant differences in citation rates both with authors' nationality and between journals. Citation rates may be influenced by journal accessibility, perceived journal 'prestige' (impact factor) or national bias. Authors, editors and reviewers should be aware of this potential bias in citation habits. Authors should strive to conduct exhaustive searches using electronic methods, so that all relevant papers are assessed, regardless of their origin.

Implementation of Data Citations and Persistent Identifiers at the ORNL DAAC

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Cook, R. B.; Santhana Vannan, S.; Devarakonda, Ranjeet; McMurry, B. F.; Kidder, J. H.; Shanafield, H. A.; Palanisamy, G.

2013-12-01

As research in Earth Science becomes more data intensive, a critical requirement of data archives is that data needs to be easily discovered, accessed, and used. One approach to improving data discovery and access is through data citations coupled with Digital Object Identifiers (DOI). Beginning in 1998, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Distributed Active Archive Center (ORNL DAAC) has issued data product citations that have been accepted and used in AGU and other peer-reviewed journals. Citation elements established by the ORNL DAAC are similar to those used for journal articles (authors, titles, information to locate, and version), and beginning in 2007 included a DOI that is persistent, actionable, specific, and complete. The citation approach used at the DAAC also allows for referring to specific subsets of the data, by including within the citation the temporal and spatial portions of the data actually used. Citations allow others to find data and reproduce the results of the research article, and also use those data to test new hypotheses, design new sample collections, or construct or evaluate models. In addition to enhancing discovery and access of the data used in a research article, the citation gives credit to data generators, data centers and their funders, and, through citation indices, determine the scientific impact of a data set. The ORNL DAAC has developed a database that links research articles and their use of ORNL DAAC data products. The database allows determination of who, in which journal, and how the data have been used, in a manner analogous to author citation indices. The ORNL DAAC has been an initial contributor to the Thomson Reuters Data Citation Index. In addition, research data products deposited at the ORNL DAAC are linked using DOIs to relevant articles in Elsevier journals available on ScienceDirect. The ultimate goal of this implementation is that citations to data products become a routine part of the scientific process.

Indicator-Assisted Evaluation and Funding of Research: Visualizing the Influence of Grants on the Number and Citation Counts of Research Papers.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Boyack, Kevin W.; Borner, Katy

2003-01-01

Reports research on analyzing and visualizing the impact of government funding on the amount and citation counts of research publications. Provides an example using grant and publication data from Behavioral and Social Science Research at the National Institute on Aging (NIA) using the VxInsight[R] visualization tool. (Author/LRW)

Citation analysis of mental health nursing journals: how should we rank thee?

PubMed

Hunt, Glenn E; Happell, Brenda; Chan, Sally W-C; Cleary, Michelle

2012-12-01

The journal impact factor (JIF), and how best to rate the performance of a journal and the articles they contain, are areas of great debate. The aim of this paper was to assess various ranking methods of journal quality for mental health nursing journals, and to list the top 10 articles that have received the most number of citations to date. Seven mental health nursing journals were chosen for the analysis of citations they received in 2010, as well as their current impact factors from two sources, and other data for ranking purposes. There was very little difference in the top four mental health nursing journals and their overall rankings when combining various bibliometric indicators. That said, the International Journal of Mental Health Nursing is currently the highest ranked mental health nursing journal based on JIF, but publishes fewer articles per year compared to other journals. Overall, very few articles received 50 or more citations. This study shows that researchers need to consider more than one ranking method when deciding where to send or publish their research. © 2012 The Authors. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing © 2012 Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.

The 100 Most-Cited Articles in Visceral Surgery: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Müller, Martin; Gloor, Beat; Candinas, Daniel; Malinka, Thomas

2016-01-01

Even though citation analysis has several limitations, it is a commonly used tool to determine the impact of scientific articles in different research fields. The study aims to identify and systematically review the 100 most cited articles in the field of visceral surgery focusing on papers that modified therapeutic concepts and influenced the surgeons' decision making. The 100 most cited clinical articles in visceral surgery were identified using Journal Citation Reports and Science Citation Index Expanded of the Web of Science (Thomson Reuters, Philadelphia, Pa., USA). Data for characterization of the articles were determined: Number of citations, research topic, journal, publication time, authorship, country of origin, type of article and level of evidence if reasonable. The 100 most cited articles were published in 17 journals; 72 articles were found in the 3 journals: New England Journal of Medicine (38), Annals of Surgery (21) and Lancet (13). The oldest article was published in 1908 in Annals of Surgery (ranked 76th) and the most recent in 2012 in Lancet (65th). Eighty articles were published between 1990 and 2010. The number of citations ranged from 667 to 4,666 (median 925). The leading country of origin was the United States with 39 articles, followed by articles originating from more than one country (30). There were 45 interventional studies (27 randomized controlled trials), 32 observational studies, 19 reviews and 4 guidelines, definitions or classifications. The level of evidence was low (IV) in 42 articles and high in 35 articles (Ia or Ib). A high number of citations did not reflect a high level of evidence. The topics and research questions of the identified articles covered a large area of visceral surgery. Some of the milestones in visceral surgery were identified. The high impact measured by citations did not reflect a high quality of research (level of evidence) in a considerable number of publications. © 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.

What Is Bibliometrics and Why Should You Care?

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

McBurney, Melissa K.; Novak, Pamela L.

When we help an author publish a book or journal article, is that the end of the job? Viewed in the aggregate, a company's publications represent one of its greatest business assets. Can professionals in the information and communication fields help their company understand the return on its investment in publishing? The field of bibliometrics studies publication patterns by using quantitative analysis and statistics. Bibliometrics can be either descriptive, such as looking at how many articles your organization has published, or evaluative, such as using citation analysis to look at how those articles influenced subsequent research by others. Counting publicationsmore » can be useful for doing some comparisons, but citation analysis allows you to look at the impact those articles have had on others by determining how often they are cited. Citation analysis can also show what journals, organizations, and even countries have high impact in different fields of research. The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) has been a leader in the citation analysis field since 1961, when ISI published the first Science Citation Index. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory has been using data from ISI for both descriptive and evaluative purposes. This data is used to track what the researchers at the Laboratory are writing and then comparing research groups within the organization over a period of years to identify trends and opportunities. PNNL has also used citation analysis to explore what organizations and academic institutions are doing research in certain fields for partnering opportunities. We have realized that the electronic system PNNL uses to approve and track its publications contains very valuable bibliometric data that can be used to make decisions about business directions for the company.« less

[Analysis of articles published in Chinese Journal of Burns winning high citation rate during 2000-2009].

PubMed

Mo, Yu; Luo, Qin; Wang, Xu; Xie, Qiu-hong

2010-06-01

To analyze the inherent quality of articles published in our journal enjoying high citation rate, and to explore strategies on improving impact of papers. Scientific papers published in Chinese Journal of Burns from February 2000 to December 2009, with citation rate equal to or higher than 20 times were collected for classification according to their publication year, publication form, subject distribution, regional and institutional distribution, frequency of authors appeared in those published papers, frequency of winning prizes, and sources of fund (national, ministerial, or provincial). Data were processed by Microsoft Excel software. Altogether 64 scientific papers with high citation rate were published from 2000 to 2006. Original articles and expert forum accounted for 55 (86.0%). Twenty-one articles of clinical study were cited frequently, among them one was cited for 79 times. Articles dealing with subjects with popular interest or cutting-edge problems were cited frequently. Most articles winning high citation rate were originated from institutions located in Chongqing, Beijing, Shanghai, and Xi'an, etc. Those scientific papers which were instructed by specialists, with high level foundation and won prizes were cited with high frequency. The top 20 articles were mainly cited by excellent doctoral dissertations and master theses originated from 11 institutions for higher education, and source journals of Chinese Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations Database. Authors should emphasize subject planning in order to compose papers with high quality. The editorial board should make arrangements with influential specialists with related skills for their contributions based on subjects of popular interest concerning the cutting-edge problems of the specific specialty, and pay close attention to papers on clinical study and those with funding from high levels, to improve impact of the articles.

Association of h-index of Editorial Board Members and Impact Factor among Radiology Journals.

PubMed

Asnafi, Solmaz; Gunderson, Tina; McDonald, Robert J; Kallmes, David F

2017-02-01

h-Index has been proposed as a useful bibliometric measure for quantifying research productivity. In this current study, we analyzed h-indices of editorial board members of Radiology journals and tested the hypothesis that editorial board members of Radiology journals with higher impact factors (IF) have higher h-indices. Sixty-two Radiology journals with IF >1 were included. Editorial board members were identified using the journals' websites. Editors' affiliations and research fields of interest were used to distinguish investigators with similar names. Bibliometric indices including number of publications, total citations, citations per publication, and h-index for each editorial board member were obtained using the Web of Science database. Chi-square or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to test for differences in bibliographic measures or demographics between groups. Among the editorial boards of 62 journals, the median [interquartile range] board h-index was 26 [18, 31] and had 36 [17, 56] members. The median journal IF was 2.27 [1.74, 3.31]. We identified a total of 2204 distinct editors; they had a median [interquartile range] h-index of 23 [13, 35], 120 [58, 215] total publications, 1938 [682, 4634] total citations, and an average of 15.7 [9.96, 24.8] citations per publication. The boards of journals with IF above the median had significantly higher h-indices (P = .002), total publications (P = .01), and total and average citations (both any [P = .003, .009] and nonself-citations [P = .001, .002]) than journals below the median. Our data indicate that board members of Radiology journals with higher IF have greater h-indices compared to lower IF journals. Copyright © 2017 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Citation searching: a systematic review case study of multiple risk behaviour interventions

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background The value of citation searches as part of the systematic review process is currently unknown. While the major guides to conducting systematic reviews state that citation searching should be carried out in addition to searching bibliographic databases there are still few studies in the literature that support this view. Rather than using a predefined search strategy to retrieve studies, citation searching uses known relevant papers to identify further papers. Methods We describe a case study about the effectiveness of using the citation sources Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science and OVIDSP MEDLINE to identify records for inclusion in a systematic review. We used the 40 included studies identified by traditional database searches from one systematic review of interventions for multiple risk behaviours. We searched for each of the included studies in the four citation sources to retrieve the details of all papers that have cited these studies. We carried out two analyses; the first was to examine the overlap between the four citation sources to identify which citation tool was the most useful; the second was to investigate whether the citation searches identified any relevant records in addition to those retrieved by the original database searches. Results The highest number of citations was retrieved from Google Scholar (1680), followed by Scopus (1173), then Web of Science (1095) and lastly OVIDSP (213). To retrieve all the records identified by the citation tracking searching all four resources was required. Google Scholar identified the highest number of unique citations. The citation tracking identified 9 studies that met the review’s inclusion criteria. Eight of these had already been identified by the traditional databases searches and identified in the screening process while the ninth was not available in any of the databases when the original searches were carried out. It would, however, have been identified by two of the database search strategies if searches had been carried out later. Conclusions Based on the results from this investigation, citation searching as a supplementary search method for systematic reviews may not be the best use of valuable time and resources. It would be useful to verify these findings in other reviews. PMID:24893958

Glioblastoma research 2006-2010: pattern of citation and systematic review of highly cited articles.

PubMed

Nieder, Carsten; Astner, Sabrina T; Grosu, Anca L

2012-11-01

High and continuously increasing research activity related to different aspects of pathogenesis, epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of glioblastoma has been performed between 2006 and 2010. Different measures of impact, visibility and quality of published research are available, each with its own pros and cons. For this review, article citation rate was chosen. Articles were identified through systematic search of the abstract database PubMed followed by analyses of total number of citations and proportion of highly cited articles, arbitrarily defined as those with ≥100, 50-99, and 25-49 citations, respectively (citation database Scopus). Overall 5831 scientific articles on the subject were published during this time period. 1.5% of all articles accumulated at least 100 citations, 3.2% were cited between 50 and 99 times, and 7.5% were cited between 25 and 49 times. Among the 10 most cited articles, 7 reported on genomic analyses, molecular subclasses of glioblastoma and/or stem cells. Overall, 18 randomized clinical trials were published between 2006 and 2010, including those with phase II design. Thirty-nine percent of them accumulated at least 50 citations and 72% were cited at least 25 times. In general, annual citation rate appeared to gradually increase during the first 2-3 years after publication before reaching high levels. A large variety of preclinical and clinical topics achieved at least 25 citations. However, areas such as quality of life, side effects, and end-of-life care were underrepresented. Efforts to increase their visibility might be warranted. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Impact of Article Page Count and Number of Authors on Citations in Disability Related Fields: A Systematic Review Article.

PubMed

Ahmed, Abubakar; Adam, Mastura; Ghafar, Norafida A; Muhammad, Murtala; Ebrahim, Nader Ale

2016-09-01

Citation metrics and total publications in a field has become the gold standard for rating researchers and viability of a field. Hence, stimulating demand for citation has led to a search for useful strategies to improve performance metric index. Meanwhile, title, abstract and morphologic qualities of the articles attract researchers to scientific publications. Yet, there is relatively little understanding of the citation trend in disability related fields. We aimed to provide an insight into the factors associated with citation increase in this field. Additionally, we tried to know at what page number an article might appear attractive to disability researchers needs. Thus, our focus is placed on the article page count and the number of authors contributing to the fields per article. To this end, we evaluated the quantitative characteristics of top cited articles in the fields with a total citation (≥50) in the Web of Science (WoS) database. Using one-way independent ANOVA, data extracted spanning a period of 1980-2015 were analyzed, while the non-parametric data analysis uses Kruskal-Walis test. Articles with 11 to 20 pages attract more citations followed by those within the range of zero to 10. Articles with upward 21 pages are the least cited. Surprisingly, articles with more than two authors are significantly ( P <0.05) less cited and the citation decreases as the number of authors increased. Collaborative studies enjoy wider utilization and more citation, yet discounted merit of additional pages and limited collaborative research in disability field is revealed in this study.

Writing a Scientific Paper III. Ethical Aspects

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Sterken, C.

2011-07-01

The main theme of this paper is truthful communication of scientific results. Therefore, concepts of truth, error, quality and value are elaborated. The following bibliometric parameters are explained: the journal impact factor, the journal cited half-life, and the journal immediacy index, as well as paper counts, citation rates, citation index and the Hirsch index. These bibliometric indices and indicators are illustrated with examples derived from bibliometric analyses of the astronomical literature. Scientific misconduct in the broadest sense is discussed by category: researcher misconduct, author misconduct, referee and grant-reviewer misconduct. But also publisher misconduct, editorial misconduct and mismanagement, and research supervisor misbehavior are dealt with. The overall signatures of scientific misconduct are focused on, as well as the causes and the cures. This is followed by a Section devoted to whistleblowing. The biases of bibliometric indices, and the use and abuse of bibliometrics are illustrated. Moreover, suggestions for remediating the present defective system of bibliometric measurement and evaluation are worked out. Finally, the hopes and concerns of our students - either expressed during or after the lectures, or through subsequent private contacts - are passed on.

Normal tissue studies in radiation oncology: A systematic review of highly cited articles and citation patterns.

PubMed

Nieder, Carsten; Andratschke, Nicolaus H; Grosu, Anca L

2014-09-01

Radiation therapy is one of the cornerstones of modern multidisciplinary cancer treatment. Normal tissue tolerance is critical as radiation-induced side effects may compromise organ function and quality of life. The importance of normal tissue research is reflected by the large number of scientific articles, which have been published between 2006 and 2010. The present study identified important areas of research as well as seminal publications. The article citation rate is among the potential indicators of scientific impact. Highly cited articles, arbitrarily defined as those with ≥15 citations, were identified via a systematic search of the citation database, Scopus. Up to 608 articles per year were published between 2006 and 2010, however, <10% of publications in each year accumulated ≥15 citations. This figure is notably low, when compared with other oncology studies. A large variety of preclinical and clinical topics, including toxicity prediction, the dose-volume relationship and radioprotectors, accumulated ≥15 citations. However, clinical prevention or mitigation studies were underrepresented. The following conclusion may be drawn from the present study; despite the improved technology that has resulted in superior dose distribution, clinical prevention or mitigation studies are critical and must receive higher priority, funding and attention.

The impact factor ranking--a challenge for scientists and publishers.

PubMed

Rieder, Simon; Bruse, Charlotte S; Michalski, Christoph W; Kleeff, Jörg; Friess, Helmut

2010-04-01

The Impact Factor (IF) has originally been designed as a bibliometric tool to estimate the relevance of a scientific journal and has as such gained widespread acceptance in the scientific community. It denominates the ratio of all citations received by a particular journal within 1 year and all original research or review articles published by that journal during the preceding 2 years. Recently, the IF is more and more frequently used to judge the importance of single articles or the scientific achievement of researchers themselves. These approaches are associated with a number of backlashes such as the inability of the IF to reflect citation rates of single articles, the lack of elimination of self-citations and the time frame within which the IF is calculated (i.e., the two preceding years). Thus, for the evaluation of single articles, citation rankings would be-though time consuming in their compilation-more adequate. For the assessment of the scientific output of individual researchers, the h-index is emerging as a valuable tool which reflects both the citation rate as well as the number of publications of a given researcher. Although the IF is suitable for judging the overall importance of journals, IF rankings should be made solely within the respective subspecialty categorizations to avoid overrepresentation of larger research areas. In conclusion, the IF remains the widest accepted qualitative tool for the benchmarking of journals, though the assessment of individual scientific quality remains a challenging endeavor.

The Mine Safety and Health Administration's criterion threshold value policy increases miners' risk of pneumoconiosis.

PubMed

Weeks, James L

2006-06-01

The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) proposes to issue citations for non-compliance with the exposure limit for respirable coal mine dust when measured exposure exceeds the exposure limit with a "high degree of confidence." This criterion threshold value (CTV) is derived from the sampling and analytical error of the measurement method. This policy is based on a combination of statistical and legal reasoning: the one-tailed 95% confidence limit of the sampling method, the apparent principle of due process and a standard of proof analogous to "beyond a reasonable doubt." This policy raises the effective exposure limit, it is contrary to the precautionary principle, it is not a fair sharing of the burden of uncertainty, and it employs an inappropriate standard of proof. Its own advisory committee and NIOSH have advised against this policy. For longwall mining sections, it results in a failure to issue citations for approximately 36% of the measured values that exceed the statutory exposure limit. Citations for non-compliance with the respirable dust standard should be issued for any measure exposure that exceeds the exposure limit.

Efficient bibliographic searches on allergy using ISI databases.

PubMed

Sáez Gómez, J M; Annan, J W; Negro Alvarez, J M; Guillen-Grima, F; Bozzola, C M; Ivancevich, J C; Aguinaga Ontoso, E

2008-01-01

The aim of this article is to provide an introduction to using databases from the Thomson ISI Web of Knowledge, with special reference to Citation Indexes as an analysis tool for publications, and also to explain the meaning of the well-known Impact Factor. We present the partially modified new Consultation Interface to enhance information search routines of these databases. It introduces distinctive methods in search bibliography, including the correct application of analysis tools, paying particular attention to Journal Citation Reports and Impact Factor. We finish this article with comment on the consequences of using the Impact Factor as a quality indicator for the assessment of journals and publications, and how to ensure measures for indexing in the Thomson ISI Databases.

The use and misuse of journal metrics and other citation indicators.

PubMed

Pendlebury, David A

2009-01-01

This article reviews the nature and use of the journal impact factor and other common bibliometric measures for assessing research in the sciences and social sciences based on data compiled by Thomson Reuters. Journal impact factors are frequently misused to assess the influence of individual papers and authors, but such uses were never intended. Thomson Reuters also employs other measures of journal influence, which are contrasted with the impact factor. Finally, the author comments on the proper use of citation data in general, often as a supplement to peer review. This review may help government policymakers, university administrators, and individual researchers become better acquainted with the potential benefits and limitations of bibliometrics in the evaluation of research.

Legends of the field: influential scholars in multicultural counseling.

PubMed

Ponterotto, Joseph G; Fingerhut, Esther C; McGuinness, Ryan

2012-10-01

This study identified the most frequently cited scholars across 28 leading multicultural textbooks used in the training of counselors and counseling psychologists. Four spheres or clusters of multicultural scholars were identified and were characterized, respectively, as having either a profound, highly significant, significant, or important impact on the academic multicultural training of counseling graduate students. The top-cited scholars across the textbooks were also examined in relation to their scholarly productivity (number of publications) and their impact (number of citations) in peer-reviewed journals. Specifically, multicultural scholars were assessed on the delta-beta coefficient, Scopus and PsycINFO publications count, Scopus citations, and the increasingly popular h-index of scientific impact. Limitations of the study and implications of the findings for counseling training were highlighted.

The validation of peer review through research impact measures and the implications for funding strategies.

PubMed

Gallo, Stephen A; Carpenter, Afton S; Irwin, David; McPartland, Caitlin D; Travis, Joseph; Reynders, Sofie; Thompson, Lisa A; Glisson, Scott R

2014-01-01

There is a paucity of data in the literature concerning the validation of the grant application peer review process, which is used to help direct billions of dollars in research funds. Ultimately, this validation will hinge upon empirical data relating the output of funded projects to the predictions implicit in the overall scientific merit scores from the peer review of submitted applications. In an effort to address this need, the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) conducted a retrospective analysis of peer review data of 2,063 applications submitted to a particular research program and the bibliometric output of the resultant 227 funded projects over an 8-year period. Peer review scores associated with applications were found to be moderately correlated with the total time-adjusted citation output of funded projects, although a high degree of variability existed in the data. Analysis over time revealed that as average annual scores of all applications (both funded and unfunded) submitted to this program improved with time, the average annual citation output per application increased. Citation impact did not correlate with the amount of funds awarded per application or with the total annual programmatic budget. However, the number of funded applications per year was found to correlate well with total annual citation impact, suggesting that improving funding success rates by reducing the size of awards may be an efficient strategy to optimize the scientific impact of research program portfolios. This strategy must be weighed against the need for a balanced research portfolio and the inherent high costs of some areas of research. The relationship observed between peer review scores and bibliometric output lays the groundwork for establishing a model system for future prospective testing of the validity of peer review formats and procedures.

Measuring co-authorship and networking-adjusted scientific impact.

PubMed

Ioannidis, John P A

2008-07-23

Appraisal of the scientific impact of researchers, teams and institutions with productivity and citation metrics has major repercussions. Funding and promotion of individuals and survival of teams and institutions depend on publications and citations. In this competitive environment, the number of authors per paper is increasing and apparently some co-authors don't satisfy authorship criteria. Listing of individual contributions is still sporadic and also open to manipulation. Metrics are needed to measure the networking intensity for a single scientist or group of scientists accounting for patterns of co-authorship. Here, I define I(1) for a single scientist as the number of authors who appear in at least I(1) papers of the specific scientist. For a group of scientists or institution, I(n) is defined as the number of authors who appear in at least I(n) papers that bear the affiliation of the group or institution. I(1) depends on the number of papers authored N(p). The power exponent R of the relationship between I(1) and N(p) categorizes scientists as solitary (R>2.5), nuclear (R = 2.25-2.5), networked (R = 2-2.25), extensively networked (R = 1.75-2) or collaborators (R<1.75). R may be used to adjust for co-authorship networking the citation impact of a scientist. I(n) similarly provides a simple measure of the effective networking size to adjust the citation impact of groups or institutions. Empirical data are provided for single scientists and institutions for the proposed metrics. Cautious adoption of adjustments for co-authorship and networking in scientific appraisals may offer incentives for more accountable co-authorship behaviour in published articles.

The Validation of Peer Review through Research Impact Measures and the Implications for Funding Strategies

PubMed Central

Gallo, Stephen A.; Carpenter, Afton S.; Irwin, David; McPartland, Caitlin D.; Travis, Joseph; Reynders, Sofie; Thompson, Lisa A.; Glisson, Scott R.

2014-01-01

There is a paucity of data in the literature concerning the validation of the grant application peer review process, which is used to help direct billions of dollars in research funds. Ultimately, this validation will hinge upon empirical data relating the output of funded projects to the predictions implicit in the overall scientific merit scores from the peer review of submitted applications. In an effort to address this need, the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) conducted a retrospective analysis of peer review data of 2,063 applications submitted to a particular research program and the bibliometric output of the resultant 227 funded projects over an 8-year period. Peer review scores associated with applications were found to be moderately correlated with the total time-adjusted citation output of funded projects, although a high degree of variability existed in the data. Analysis over time revealed that as average annual scores of all applications (both funded and unfunded) submitted to this program improved with time, the average annual citation output per application increased. Citation impact did not correlate with the amount of funds awarded per application or with the total annual programmatic budget. However, the number of funded applications per year was found to correlate well with total annual citation impact, suggesting that improving funding success rates by reducing the size of awards may be an efficient strategy to optimize the scientific impact of research program portfolios. This strategy must be weighed against the need for a balanced research portfolio and the inherent high costs of some areas of research. The relationship observed between peer review scores and bibliometric output lays the groundwork for establishing a model system for future prospective testing of the validity of peer review formats and procedures. PMID:25184367

Novelty and Foreseeing Research Trends: The Case of Astrophysics and Astronomy

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Varga, Attila

2018-05-01

Metrics based on reference lists of research articles or on keywords have been used to predict citation impact. The concept behind such metrics is that original ideas stem from the reconfiguration of the structure of past knowledge, and therefore atypical combinations in the reference lists, keywords, or classification codes indicate future high-impact research. The current paper serves as an introduction to this line of research for astronomers and also addresses some of the methodological questions in this field of innovation studies. It is still not clear if the choice of particular indexes, such as references to journals, articles, or specific bibliometric classification codes affects the relationship between atypical combinations and citation impact. To understand more aspects of the innovation process, a new metric has been devised to measure to what extent researchers are able to anticipate the changing combinatorial trends of the future. Results show that the variant of the latter anticipation scores that is based on paper combinations is a good predictor of the future citation impact of scholarly works. The study also shows that the effects of tested indexes vary with the aggregation levels that were used to construct them. A detailed analysis of combinatorial novelty in the field reveals that certain sub-fields of astronomy and astrophysics have different roles in the reconfiguration of past knowledge.

[Analysis of academic impact of publications from National Institute of Parasitic Diseases, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention based on SCIE database in recent five years].

PubMed

Zhen, Li; Bin, Zheng

2017-03-02

To describe the academic impact of publications from National Institute of Parasitic Diseases (NIPD), Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, so as to give the quantity evidence for scientific research decision making. The SCIE papers of NIPD published from 2011-2015 were searched and statistically analyzed. The number of published papers, citation frequencies, h-index, and funding resources were analyzed. The academic impact of the institute was assessed according to these data. A total of 361 papers were published by NIPD, and the quantity increased year by year. The majority type is original articles. The total citations were 1 641 times, the average citation per paper was 5.19 and h-index was 17. The majority of these papers were published in foreign professional periodicals, whose impact factors were between 1.194 and 6.751. The major resources of NIPD were from China, and NIPD also had good collaborations with institutions in US and Switzerland. In China and Asia, NIPD led the research in the field of parasitology and tropical medicine. The quantity and quality of annual published papers of NIPD are on the rise. However, NIPD lagged behind the leading institutions in the world.

[Spanish versus English as a language of publication and impact factor of Neurologia].

PubMed

Aleixandre-Benavent, R; Valderrama Zurián, J C; Alonso-Arroyo, A; Miguel-Dasit, A; González de Dios, J; de Granda Orive, Ji

2007-01-01

Although the English language is considered nowadays as the international language of medical publications, some important Spanish journals with impact factor in the Journal Citation Reports as Neurologia, they bet for the publication in Spanish. Neurologia is the official publication of the Sociedad Española de Neurología and there is the conviction that you can have a Spanish language journal with a high quality and a strong impact. Its presence in the most important international data bases and the possibility of free access to its contents through Internet guarantees its proper diffusion around the world. From the point of view of citation, the repercussion of the language for Neurologia, is reflected in the fact that the 46,8 % of the citations that receive are from journals that are published in Spanish. The main factor to improve the impact of the journal is the quality of their papers, as well as the fulfillment of the international rules about periodical publications, the punctuality in its edition and distribution, the presence in national and international bibliographical data bases, its free diffusion in Internet, the training of its researchers and their sensitivity to consult and cite articles that have been published in quality Spanish journals, when necessary.

Citation parameters of contact lens-related articles published in the ophthalmic literature.

PubMed

Cardona, Genís; Sanz, Joan P

2014-09-01

This study aimed at exploring the citation parameters of contact lenses articles published in the Ophthalmology thematic category of the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). The Thompson Reuters Web of Science database was accessed to record bibliometric information and citation parameters of all journals listed under the Ophthalmology area of the 2011 JCR edition, including the journals with main publication interests in the contact lens field. In addition, the same database was used to unveil all contact lens-related articles published in 2011 in the same thematic area, whereupon differences in citation parameters between those articles published in contact lens and non-contact lens-related journals were explored. Significant differences in some bibliometric indicators such as half-life and overall citation count were found between contact lens-related journals (shorter half-life and fewer citations) and the median values for the Ophthalmology thematic area of the JCR. Visual examination of all Ophthalmology journals uncovered a total of 156 contact lens-related articles, published in 28 different journals, with 27 articles each for Contact Lens & Anterior Eye, Eye & Contact Lens, and Optometry and Vision Science. Significant differences in citation parameters were encountered between those articles published in contact lens and non-contact lens source journals. These findings, which disclosed contact lenses to be a fertile area of research, may be of interest to researchers and institutions. Differences in bibliometric indicators are of relevance to avoid unwanted bias when conducting between- and within-discipline comparisons of articles, journals, and researchers.

The 100 most-cited articles on aortic dissection.

PubMed

Lai, Ping; Liu, Yuan-Hui; Xue, Jin-Hua; He, Peng-Cheng; Qiu, Yue-Qun

2017-01-17

To identify and characterize the most frequently cited articles that have been published on aortic dissection. A list of the 100 most frequently cited publications (T100) about aortic dissection was generated by performing a searching of the Science Citation Index--Expanded using "aortic dissection" as the search term. Basic information about the articles was recorded, including number of citations, journal title, journal impact factor, time since publication, first author's country, topic/subspecialty of the research, and publication type. We finally included 180 articles on aortic dissection, from which we identified the 100 most frequently cited articles (T100). The most frequently cited article received 1079 citations, while the least frequently cited article received 68 (mean140.5 citations per article). The T100 originated from 19 countries, with more than half of them originating from the USA (n = 97). The T100 articles were published from 1955 to 2013, with 79% published during the period 1990-2009. In addition, there were 40 different journals with Circulation having the most citations (n = 38). Regarding the article type, there were 21 basic and 140 clinical research articles, one meta-analysis, and 18 review articles. Reviews had the highest mean number of citations (mean 235.5 citations per article). Our study provides a historical perspective on the progress of dissection research, and helps to identify the quality of the work, the discoveries made, and the trends steering the studies.

Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping.

PubMed

Siler, Kyle; Lee, Kirby; Bero, Lisa

2015-01-13

Peer review is the main institution responsible for the evaluation and gestation of scientific research. Although peer review is widely seen as vital to scientific evaluation, anecdotal evidence abounds of gatekeeping mistakes in leading journals, such as rejecting seminal contributions or accepting mediocre submissions. Systematic evidence regarding the effectiveness--or lack thereof--of scientific gatekeeping is scant, largely because access to rejected manuscripts from journals is rarely available. Using a dataset of 1,008 manuscripts submitted to three elite medical journals, we show differences in citation outcomes for articles that received different appraisals from editors and peer reviewers. Among rejected articles, desk-rejected manuscripts, deemed as unworthy of peer review by editors, received fewer citations than those sent for peer review. Among both rejected and accepted articles, manuscripts with lower scores from peer reviewers received relatively fewer citations when they were eventually published. However, hindsight reveals numerous questionable gatekeeping decisions. Of the 808 eventually published articles in our dataset, our three focal journals rejected many highly cited manuscripts, including the 14 most popular; roughly the top 2 percent. Of those 14 articles, 12 were desk-rejected. This finding raises concerns regarding whether peer review is ill--suited to recognize and gestate the most impactful ideas and research. Despite this finding, results show that in our case studies, on the whole, there was value added in peer review. Editors and peer reviewers generally--but not always-made good decisions regarding the identification and promotion of quality in scientific manuscripts.

Impact of Article Page Count and Number of Authors on Citations in Disability Related Fields: A Systematic Review Article

PubMed Central

AHMED, Abubakar; ADAM, Mastura; GHAFAR, Norafida A.; MUHAMMAD, Murtala; EBRAHIM, Nader Ale

2016-01-01

Background: Citation metrics and total publications in a field has become the gold standard for rating researchers and viability of a field. Hence, stimulating demand for citation has led to a search for useful strategies to improve performance metric index. Meanwhile, title, abstract and morphologic qualities of the articles attract researchers to scientific publications. Yet, there is relatively little understanding of the citation trend in disability related fields. We aimed to provide an insight into the factors associated with citation increase in this field. Additionally, we tried to know at what page number an article might appear attractive to disability researchers needs. Thus, our focus is placed on the article page count and the number of authors contributing to the fields per article. Methods: To this end, we evaluated the quantitative characteristics of top cited articles in the fields with a total citation (≥50) in the Web of Science (WoS) database. Using one-way independent ANOVA, data extracted spanning a period of 1980–2015 were analyzed, while the non-parametric data analysis uses Kruskal-Walis test. Results: Articles with 11 to 20 pages attract more citations followed by those within the range of zero to 10. Articles with upward 21 pages are the least cited. Surprisingly, articles with more than two authors are significantly (P<0.05) less cited and the citation decreases as the number of authors increased. Conclusion: Collaborative studies enjoy wider utilization and more citation, yet discounted merit of additional pages and limited collaborative research in disability field is revealed in this study. PMID:27957456

[Analysis of the academic level and impact of ophthalmological periodicals in China].

PubMed

Xu, Xiao-quan; Mao, Wen-ming; Zheng, Jun-hai; Qu, Jia

2009-04-01

To analyse the whole level and impact of ophthalmological periodicals in China. It was studied by using bibliometrics analysis method. According to the data of CAJCCR in 2002 to 2007 and Chinese Citation Database in 2001 to 2007. The impact factor (IF), non-self-citing impact factor, total cited frequency, cited articles, immediacy index, rate of fund papers, web immediacy download rate, average value of h index were analysed and the non-self-citing rate, h(2)/n, high cited articles were calculated. In addition, the results of cited by cole databases at home and abroad. The average value of IF and cited frequency of 13 kinds of ophthalmological periodicals were 0.3940 and 657 respectively in 2001 to 2006, which were higher than that of D part of CAJCCR. The periodicals which the five indexes of IF, non-self-citing impact factor, total cited frequency, the non-self-citing rate, immediacy index, rate of fund papers, web immediacy download rate, average value of h index and h(2)/n, high cited articles were Top 5 and cited by five or more than five kinds of the cole databases at home and abroad were Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology, Chinese Journal of Ocular Fundus Diseases, Practical Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology and Chinese Journal of Optometry & Ophthalmology. Most of indexes of Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology were the first. There are big difference between the 13 kinds of ophthalmological periodicals. The qualities of some ophthalmological periodicals should be improved.

[New bibliometric indicators for the scientific literature: an evolving panorama].

PubMed

La Torre, G; Sciarra, I; Chiappetta, M; Monteduro, A

2017-01-01

Bibliometrics is a science which evaluates the impact of the scientific work of a journal or of an author, using mathematical and statistical tools. Impact Factor (IF) is the first bibliometric parameter created, and after it many others have been progressively conceived in order to go beyond its limits. Currently bibliometric indexes are used for academic purposes, among them to evaluate the eligibility of a researcher to compete for the National Scientific Qualification, in order to access to competitive exams to become professor. Aim of this study is to identify the most relevant bibliometric indexes and to summarized their characteristics. A revision of bibliometric indexes as been conducted, starting from the classic ones and completing with the most recent ones. The two most used bibliometric indexes are the IF, which measures the scientific impact of a periodical and bases on Web of Science citation database, and the h-index, which measures the impact of the scientific work of a researcher, basing on Scopus database. Besides them other indexes have been created more recently, such as the SCImago Journal Rank Indicator (SJR), the Source Normalised Impact per Paper (SNIP) and the CiteScore index. They are all based on Scopus database and evaluate, in different ways, the citational impact of a periodic. The i10-index instead is provided from Google Scholar database and allows to evaluate the impact of the scientific production of a researcher. Recently two softwares have been introduced: the first one, Publish or Perish, allows to evaluate the scientific work of a researcher, through the assessment of many indexes; the second one, Altmetric, measure the use in the Web of the academic papers, instead of measuring citations, by means of alternative metrics respect to the traditional ones. Each analized index shows advantages but also criticalities. Therefore the combined use of more than one indexes, citational and not, should be preferred, in order to correctly evaluate the work of reserchers and to finally improve the quality and the development of scientific research.

Iain Stewart Receives 2013 Athelstan Spilhaus Award: Citation

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Wright, Tim

2014-01-01

It is a great pleasure and an honor to give the citation for the 2013 Athelstan Spilhaus awardee, Iain Stewart, professor of geoscience communication at the University of Plymouth, recognizing his truly exceptional work over the last decade in communicating geoscience to the general public. Iain has been making documentaries for the BBC, National Geographic, and Discovery for nearly a decade. These programs have huge international audiences and wide-reaching impact.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

NONE

The bibliography contains citations concerning the use of biological agents to control insects and pests. Radiation, genetic breeding, bacteria, fungi, viruses, and pheromones are discussed as alternatives to pesticidal management. Methods for monitoring the effectiveness and environmental impact of these agents are reviewed. Population control of fruit flies, spruce sawflies, flies, mosquitoes, cockroaches, gypsy moths, and other agriculturally-important insects is also discussed. (Contains a minimum of 190 citations and includes a subject term index and title list.)

Leading North American programs in clinical assessment research: an assessment of productivity and impact.

PubMed

Morey, Leslie C

2010-05-01

To identify doctoral programs with strong concentrations in clinical assessment, I measured productivity and impact of faculty at North American institutions with American Psychological Association accredited clinical programs. Publications, citations, and h-indexes derived from 4 top assessment journals were calculated over a 10-year period (1999-2009). I identified a total of 42 leading programs that collectively accounted for more than half of the publications and citations in these journals. I found a moderate relationship between assessment productivity and both US News & World Report program rankings as well as general productivity rankings of clinical programs reported in an earlier study.

Costa Rica publications in the Science Citation Index Expanded: a bibliometric analysis for 1981-2010.

PubMed

Monge-Nájera, Julián; Ho, Yuh-Shan

2012-12-01

Despite of its small size, the Central American country of Costa Rica is internationally recognized as one of the world leaders in conservation and as the Central American leader in science. There have been no recent studies on the country's scientific production. The objective of this study was to analyze the Costa Rican scientific output as represented in the Science Citation Index Expanded. All documents with "Costa Rica" in the address field from 1981 to 2010 were included (total 6 801 publications). Articles (79%) were more frequent than other types of publication and were mostly in English (83%). Revista de Biología Tropical published the most articles (17%), followed by Toxicon and Turrialba (2.5%). The New England Journal of Medicine had the highest impact factor (53.484) with nine articles. Of 5 343 articles with known institutional address, 63%were internationally collaborative articles (most with the USA) with h index 91 and citation per publication 18. A total of 81% of all articles were inter-institutionally collaborative articles, led by the Universidad de Costa Rica. This reflects research and education agreements among these countries. Universidad de Costa Rica ranked top one in inter-institutionally collaborative articles, the rank of the total inter-institutionally collaborative articles, and the rank of first author articles and corresponding author articles. Studied subjects and journals in our sample are in agreement with dominant science fields and journals in Costa Rica. Articles with the highest citation were published in New England Journal of Medicine. The largest citation of medical articles reflects the general interest and wider readership of this subject. All corresponding and first authors of the high impact articles were not from Costa Rica. In conclusion, the scientific output of Costa Rican authors is strong in the areas related to conservation but the impact is higher for biomedical articles, and Costa Rican authors need to improve their position within research teams.

Bibliometric measures and National Institutes of Health funding at colleges of osteopathic medicine, 2006-2010.

PubMed

Suminski, Richard R; Hendrix, Dean; May, Linda E; Wasserman, Jason A; Guillory, V James

2012-11-01

During the past 20 years, colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs) have made several advances in research that have substantially improved the osteopathic medical profession and the health of the US population. Furthering the understanding of research at COMs, particularly the factors influencing the attainment of extramural funds, is highly warranted and coincides with the missions of most COMs and national osteopathic organizations. To describe bibliometric measures (numbers of peer-reviewed publications [ie, published articles] and citations of these publications, impact indices) at COMs from 2006 through 2010 and to examine statistical associations between these measures and the amount of National Institutes of Health (NIH) research funds awarded to COMs in 2006 and 2010. A customized, systematic search of the Web of Science database was used to obtain bibliometric measures for 28 COMs. For the analyses, the bibliometric measures were summed or averaged over a 5-year period (2006 through 2010). The NIH database was used to obtain the amount of NIH funds for research grants and contracts received by the 28 COMs. Bivariate and multivariate statistical procedures were used to explore relationships between bibliometric measures and NIH funding amounts. The COMs with 2010 NIH funding, compared with COMs without NIH funding, had greater numbers of publications and citations and higher yearly average impact indices. Funding from the NIH in 2006 and 2010 was positively and significantly correlated with the numbers of publications, citations, and citations per publication and impact indices. The regression analysis indicated that 63.2% and 38.5% of the total variance in 2010 NIH funding explained by the model (adjusted R(2)=0.74) was accounted for by 2006 NIH funding and the combined bibliometric (ie, publications plus citations), respectively. Greater scholarly output leads to the procurement of more NIH funds for research at COMs.

Bibliometric analysis of 100 most cited articles on oral submucous fibrosis.

PubMed

Gondivkar, Shailesh M; Sarode, Sachin C; Gadbail, Amol R; Gondivkar, Rima S; Chole, Revant; Sarode, Gargi S

2018-06-15

Citation analysis reflects the scientific recognition and influential performance of an article in the scientific community. The objective of this study was to identify and characterize the 100 most cited articles on oral submucous fibrosis (OSF). A list of 100 most cited articles related to OSF was retrieved from the Science Citation Index-Expanded tool of Scopus database in May 2018.The articles were further reviewed, and basic information was recorded including the number of citations, citation density, journals, with its impact factor, category and quartile, publication year, authors, institution and country of origin, article type and level of evidence. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the results. The most frequently cited article received 780 citations, while the least frequently cited article received 49 (mean107.5 citations per article). There were 38 different journals with Journal of Oral Pathology and Medicine having the most citations (n = 22).The 100 most cited articles were published from 1966 to 2013, with 81% published after 1990.Thirteen authors listed 5 or more articles in the top 100 list and India was found to be the most prolific country with 38 articles. In terms of article type, there were 72 research articles and 28 review articles. This first citation analysis of the 100 most cited articles render a historical perspective on the progress of research in the field of OSF and enables the comprehensive identification and recognition of the most important and relevant research topics concerned. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Highest Impact Articles in Microsurgery: A Citation Analysis.

PubMed

Kim, Kuylhee; Ibrahim, Ahmed M S; Koolen, Pieter G L; Markarian, Mark K; Lee, Bernard T; Lin, Samuel J

2015-09-01

Microsurgery has developed significantly since the inception of the first surgical microscope. There have been few attempts to describe "classic" microsurgery articles. In this study citation analysis was done to identify the most highly cited clinical and basic science articles published in five peer-reviewed plastic surgery journals. Thomson/Reuters web of knowledge was used to identify the most highly cited microsurgery articles from five journals: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Annals of Plastic Surgery, Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery, and Microsurgery. Articles were identified and sorted based on the number of citations and citations per year. The 50 most cited clinical and basic science articles were identified. For clinical articles, number of total citations ranged from 120 to 691 (mean, 212.38) and citations per year ranged from 30.92 to 3.05 (mean, 9.33). The most common defect site was the head and neck (n = 15, 30%), and flaps were perforator and muscle/musculocutaneous flaps (n = 10 each, 20%, respectively). For basic science articles, number of citations ranged from 71 to 332 (mean, 130.82) and citations per year ranged from 2.20 to 11.07 (mean, 5.27). There were 27 animal, 21 cadaveric, and 2 combined studies. The most highly cited microsurgery articles are a direct reflection of the educational and clinical trends. Awareness of the most frequently cited articles may serve as a basis for core knowledge in the education of plastic surgery trainees. III. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Elsevier’s CiteScore index values for Acta Dermatovenerologica Alpina, Pannonica et Adriatica: a 2016 update

PubMed

Šterbenc, Anja; Oštrbenk, Anja

2017-09-01

Elsevier’s recently launched citation metric CiteScore enables comprehensive, transparent, and current evaluation of a journal’s performance. For an editorial office, insight into a journal’s impact over time is of great value when making important decisions regarding the journal’s future. A 2016 update of CiteScore index values for Acta Dermatovenerologica Alpina, Pannonica et Adri- atica (Acta Dermatovenerol APA) showed a slight decrease in the CiteScore index value from 1.18 in 2015 to 0.96 in 2016. Acta Dermatovenerol APA can still be considered the principal journal in the field of dermatology and sexually transmitted infections in our region, with almost half of the articles published between 2013 and 2015 cited at least once in 2016. Acta Dermatovenerol APA performed well in both categories listed because it ranked 67th out of 121 journals in the category Dermatology (44th percentile) and 175th out of 250 journals in the category Infectious Diseases (30th percentile).

The 100 Most-Cited Articles Focused on Ultrasound Imaging: A Bibliometric Analysis.

PubMed

Moon, J Y; Yun, E J; Yoon, D Y; Choi, C S; Seo, Y L; Cho, Y K; Lim, K J; Baek, S; Hong, S J; Yoon, S J

2017-06-01

Purpose  The number of citations that an article has received reflects its impact on a particular research area. The aim of this study was to identify the 100 most-cited articles focused on ultrasound (US) imaging and to analyze the characteristics of these articles. Methods  We determined the 100 most-cited articles on US imaging via the Web of Science database, using the search term. The following parameters were used to analyze the characteristics of the 100 most-cited articles: publication year, journal, journal impact factor, number of citations and annual citations, authors, department, institution, country, type of article, and topic. Results  The number of citations for the 100 most-cited articles ranged from 1849 to 341 (median: 442.0) and the number of annual citations ranged from 108.0 to 8.1 (median: 22.1). The majority of articles were published in 1990 - 1999 (39 %), published in radiology journals (20 %), originated in the United States (45 %), were clinical observation studies (67 %), and dealt with the vessels (35 %). The Department of Internal Medicine at the University of California and the Research Institute of Public Health at the University of Kuopio (n = 4 each) were the leading institutions and Salonen JT and Salonen R (n = 4 each) were the most prolific authors. Conclusion  Our study presents a detailed list and analysis of the 100 most-cited US articles, which provides a unique insight into the historical development in this field. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Trends in the Authorship of Peer Reviewed Publications in the Urology Literature.

PubMed

An, Julie Y; Baiocco, Joseph A; Rais-Bahrami, Soroush

2018-05-01

We evaluated the authorship count of all original research and review articles published in prominent Urology journals to trend patterns in authorship over the last decade. Secondarily, we evaluated bibliometric assessments and sought to understand whether authorship count was associated with citation rate and each article's field-normalized measure of impact. Information on authorship count, date of publication, study type, journal of publication, citation rate, and relative citation ratio (RCR) was collected for all original research and review articles published in European Urology, Journal of Urology, Urology , and British Journal of Urology International between 2006 and 2016. We examined trends in authorship count over the past decade, as well as between journals and article types. 21,336 articles were analyzed, of which 19,527 (91.5%) were original research and 1,809 (8.5%) were review articles. Overall, number of authors increased 46.1% from 2006 to 2016. Authorship counts in original research articles increased by an average of 2.45 per manuscript (43.3% increase) over the decade analyzed. More dramatically, authorship counts in review articles increased by an average of 3.14 per manuscript (92.6% increase). Articles with higher authorship counts were associated with more citations and greater RCR (r=0.13, p<0.001). There is a global trend towards more authors per article in urology publications-in both original research publications and review articles, and across each of the individual journals evaluated. An increase in author count has also been associated with increased citations and measures of article impact.

A bibliometric study of scientific literature on the dietary therapies for epilepsy in Scopus.

PubMed

Morandi, Gabriella; Guido, Davide; Tagliabue, Anna

2015-07-01

The aim of this study was to provide a descriptive overview of the impact and production of literature on dietary therapies for epilepsy and perform a citation analysis of the related research articles. We searched for 'ketogenic OR low-glycemic OR medium chain OR modified Atkins in TITLE AND epilep*' in Title/Abstract/Keyword in Scopus database. A total of 661 references were retrieved, 80% had been published after 2000s, 87% were published in English, and 39% of the publications were published in nine journals. The majority (76.3%) of research articles describe the clinical application of the dietary therapies regarding the classical ketogenic diet (80%), followed by the modified Atkins diet (11.5%), medium chain triglyceride diet (6.4%), and low glycemic index treatment (2.0%); the remaining are basic science studies on the mechanisms of action. The citation analysis revealed that the latter have the highest percentage variation in citation per publication across the years. Concerning the article cohorts, the greatest number of citations per publication was in 1998. The overview of the literature on the dietary therapy of epilepsy evidences a growing interest in the field with a striking prevalence of clinical over basic science studies. The most cited clinical studies have validated the efficacy of the dietary therapies; the few studies on the mechanisms of action received a great number of citations. Bibliometric analysis measuring the trends and the impact of the scientific literature would help researchers to a best knowledge of this specific topic.

Citations of plenary-session articles published in the Proceedings of the International Symposium on Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics.

PubMed

Salman, M D; Dewell, Reneé; Willeberg, Preben; GrandMaison, Nadine; Schoenbaum, Melissa; Moothart, Tom

2007-06-15

We measured the potential impact of articles representing the International Symposium on Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics (ISVEE) plenary-session presentations in subsequent published literature. Between July 1, 2004 and November 9, 2004, we searched the Web of Science for citations in the scientific literature to all 99 plenary-session articles published in the proceedings of the previous nine ISVEEs (or in journal special issues dedicated to the ISVEE plenary articles). We used a 4-year window around the publication of each of the ISVEE proceedings. We located 187 citations for 37 (of the 99) articles. We infer that the ISVEE proceedings represent an important resource for veterinary epidemiology.

Impact of lexical and sentiment factors on the popularity of scientific papers

PubMed Central

Sienkiewicz, Julian; Altmann, Eduardo G.

2016-01-01

We investigate how textual properties of scientific papers relate to the number of citations they receive. Our main finding is that correlations are nonlinear and affect differently the most cited and typical papers. For instance, we find that, in most journals, short titles correlate positively with citations only for the most cited papers, whereas for typical papers, the correlation is usually negative. Our analysis of six different factors, calculated both at the title and abstract level of 4.3 million papers in over 1500 journals, reveals the number of authors, and the length and complexity of the abstract, as having the strongest (positive) influence on the number of citations. PMID:27429773

Impact of lexical and sentiment factors on the popularity of scientific papers

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Sienkiewicz, Julian; Altmann, Eduardo G.

2016-06-01

We investigate how textual properties of scientific papers relate to the number of citations they receive. Our main finding is that correlations are nonlinear and affect differently the most cited and typical papers. For instance, we find that, in most journals, short titles correlate positively with citations only for the most cited papers, whereas for typical papers, the correlation is usually negative. Our analysis of six different factors, calculated both at the title and abstract level of 4.3 million papers in over 1500 journals, reveals the number of authors, and the length and complexity of the abstract, as having the strongest (positive) influence on the number of citations.

Measuring discursive influence across scholarship.

PubMed

Gerow, Aaron; Hu, Yuening; Boyd-Graber, Jordan; Blei, David M; Evans, James A

2018-03-27

Assessing scholarly influence is critical for understanding the collective system of scholarship and the history of academic inquiry. Influence is multifaceted, and citations reveal only part of it. Citation counts exhibit preferential attachment and follow a rigid "news cycle" that can miss sustained and indirect forms of influence. Building on dynamic topic models that track distributional shifts in discourse over time, we introduce a variant that incorporates features, such as authorship, affiliation, and publication venue, to assess how these contexts interact with content to shape future scholarship. We perform in-depth analyses on collections of physics research (500,000 abstracts; 102 years) and scholarship generally (JSTOR repository: 2 million full-text articles; 130 years). Our measure of document influence helps predict citations and shows how outcomes, such as winning a Nobel Prize or affiliation with a highly ranked institution, boost influence. Analysis of citations alongside discursive influence reveals that citations tend to credit authors who persist in their fields over time and discount credit for works that are influential over many topics or are "ahead of their time." In this way, our measures provide a way to acknowledge diverse contributions that take longer and travel farther to achieve scholarly appreciation, enabling us to correct citation biases and enhance sensitivity to the full spectrum of scholarly impact. Copyright © 2018 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.

Measuring discursive influence across scholarship

PubMed Central

Gerow, Aaron; Hu, Yuening; Boyd-Graber, Jordan; Blei, David M.

2018-01-01

Assessing scholarly influence is critical for understanding the collective system of scholarship and the history of academic inquiry. Influence is multifaceted, and citations reveal only part of it. Citation counts exhibit preferential attachment and follow a rigid “news cycle” that can miss sustained and indirect forms of influence. Building on dynamic topic models that track distributional shifts in discourse over time, we introduce a variant that incorporates features, such as authorship, affiliation, and publication venue, to assess how these contexts interact with content to shape future scholarship. We perform in-depth analyses on collections of physics research (500,000 abstracts; 102 years) and scholarship generally (JSTOR repository: 2 million full-text articles; 130 years). Our measure of document influence helps predict citations and shows how outcomes, such as winning a Nobel Prize or affiliation with a highly ranked institution, boost influence. Analysis of citations alongside discursive influence reveals that citations tend to credit authors who persist in their fields over time and discount credit for works that are influential over many topics or are “ahead of their time.” In this way, our measures provide a way to acknowledge diverse contributions that take longer and travel farther to achieve scholarly appreciation, enabling us to correct citation biases and enhance sensitivity to the full spectrum of scholarly impact. PMID:29531061

Status and Impact of Acupuncture Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of Global and Brazilian Scientific Output from 2000 to 2014.

PubMed

Moré, Ari O; Tesser, Charles Dalcanale; da Silva, João B; Min, Li Shih

2016-06-01

This bibliometric study was designed to evaluate the scientific output of Brazilian acupuncture publications and compare that output to the global trends in the same area. The analyzed data were retrieved from the online version of Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E) database and covered the period from 2000 to 2014. The documents were searched by using the topic filter to find acupuncture-related documents (ARDs) and the title filter for acupuncture-specific documents (ASDs). The analyzed categories included number of publications, type of documents, number of citations, universities/institutions, research areas, and journals. A total of 9301 ARDs and 5974 ASDs were published in the past 15 years worldwide. The global average number of citations per document was 10.61 for ARDs and 9.24 for ASDs. Brazil has published 252 ARDs and 169 ASDs, which corresponds to the tenth and ninth positions on the global correspondent rankings. The United States is the most productive country, with 2503 ARD publications, followed by China with 2143 and South Korea with 925. Norway is in the first position for the ARD citation rank, with 25.77 citations per document; Switzerland is in the first position for the ASD citation rank, with 26.66. Brazil has 4.19 citations per document, which corresponds to the 20th position in the ASD citation rankings. Evidence-Based Complementary Medicine, Acupuncture in Medicine, and The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine are the leading journals in terms of numbers of ARDs and ASDs in Brazil and globally. The bibliometric analysis of the SCI-E database shows that global numbers of ARDs and ASDs and citations have constantly increased from 2000 to 2014. Brazil is among the top 10 most productive countries in the world in terms of number of acupuncture publications. However, the number of citations of Brazilian documents is below the global average.

Scaling behavior in the dynamics of citations to scientific journals

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Picoli, S., Jr.; Mendes, R. S.; Malacarne, L. C.; Lenzi, E. K.

2006-08-01

We analyze a database comprising the impact factor (citations per recent items published) of scientific journals for a 13-year period (1992 2004). We find that i) the distribution of impact factors follows asymptotic power law behavior, ii) the distribution of annual logarithmic growth rates has an exponential form, and iii) the width of this distribution decays with the impact factor as a power law with exponent β simeq 0.22. The results ii) and iii) are surprising similar to those observed in the growth dynamics of organizations with complex internal structure suggesting the existence of common mechanisms underlying the dynamics of these systems. We propose a general model for such systems, an extension of the simplest model for firm growth, and compare their predictions with our empirical results.

The study of co-citation analysis and knowledge structure on healthcare domain

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Chu, Kuo-Chung; Liu, Wen-I.; Tsai, Ming-Yu

2012-11-01

With the prevalence of Internet and digital archives, the online e-journal database facilitates scholars to search literature in a research domain, or to cross-search an inter-disciplined field; the key literature can be efficiently traced out. This study intends to build a Web-based citation analysis system, which consists of four modules, they are: 1) literature search module; (2) statistics module; (3) articles analysis module; and (4) co-citation analysis module. The system focuses on PubMed Central dataset that has 170,000 records. In a research domain, a specific keyword searches in terms of authors, journals, and core issues. In addition, we use data mining techniques for co-citation analysis. The results assist researchers with in-depth understanding of the domain knowledge. Having an automated system for co-citation analysis, it helps to understand changes, trends, and knowledge structure of research domain. For the best of our knowledge, the proposed system differentiates from existing online electronic retrieval database analysis function. Perhaps, the proposed system is going to be a value-added database of healthcare domain, and hope to contribute the researchers.

Quantifying Published Scholarly Works of Experiential Education Directors

PubMed Central

McElroy, Sara

2013-01-01

Objective. To determine the amount and potential impact of scholarly works that directors of experiential education in US colleges and schools of pharmacy have published since 2001. Methods. A search in Web of Science was used to identify publications and citations for the years 2001-2011 by experiential education directors as identified by the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Roster of Faculty and Professional Staff in 2011. Publication productivity was analyzed by position title, faculty rank, and type of institution (public vs private, research vs nonresearch-intensive). Types of published works were characterized, related citations were identified, and a reported h-index was collected for each person who published during this period. Results. Ninety-seven of 226 (43%) experiential education directors published 344 scholarly works which had received 1841 citations, for an average of 1 publication every 3 years and an average citation rate of 5.3 per publication. Directors at publicly funded and research-intensive institutions published slightly more than did their counterparts at private and nonresearch-intensive schools. Publications were concentrated in 6 journals with a weighted mean publication impact factor of 1.5. Conclusion. Many experiential education directors have published scholarly works even though their titles and ranks vary widely. While the quantity of such works may not be large, the impact is similar to that of other pharmacy practice faculty members. These results could be used to characterize the scholarly performance of experiential education directors in recent years as well as to establish a culture of scholarship in this emerging career track within pharmacy education. PMID:24159208

Research Productivity and Rankings of Anesthesiology Departments in Canada and the United States: The Relationship Between the h-Index and Other Common Metrics [RETRACTED].

PubMed

Bunting, Alexandra C; Alavifard, Sepand; Walker, Benjamin; Miller, Donald R; Ramsay, Tim; Boet, Sylvain

2018-03-05

To evaluate the relative research productivity and ranking of anesthesiology departments in Canada and the United States, using the Hirsch index (h-index) and 4 other previously validated metrics. We identified 150 anesthesiology departments in Canada and the United States with an accredited residency program. Publications for each of the 150 departments were identified using Thomson's Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science, and the citation report for each department was exported. The bibliometric data were used to calculate publication metrics for 3 time periods: cumulative (1945-2014), 10 years (2005-2014), and 5 years (2010-2014). The following group metrics were then used to determine the publication impact and relative ranking of all 150 departments: h-index, m-index, total number of publications, sum of citations, and average number of citations per article. Ranking for each metric were also stratified by using a proxy for departmental size. The most common journals in which US and Canadian anesthesiology departments publish their work were identified. The majority (23 of the top 25) of top-ranked anesthesiology departments are in the United States, and 2 of the top 25 departments (University of Toronto; McGill University) are in Canada. There was a strong positive relationship between each of h-index, total number of publications, and the sum of citations (0.91-0.97; P < .0001). Departmental size correlates with increased academic productivity on most metrics. The most frequent journals in which US and Canadian anesthesiology departments publish are Anesthesiology, Anesthesia and Analgesia, and the Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. Our study ranked the Canadian and US anesthesiology departmental research productivity using the h-index applied to each department, total number of publications, total number of citations, and average number of citations. The strong relationship between the h-index and both the number of publications and number of citations of anesthesiology departments shows that the departments with the highest number of publications are also producing research with the most highly cited articles (ie, most impact), as demonstrated by the h-index.

Fifty most-cited articles in anterior cruciate ligament research.

PubMed

Voleti, Pramod B; Tjoumakaris, Fotios P; Rotmil, Gayle; Freedman, Kevin B

2015-04-01

The number of times an article has been cited in the peer-reviewed literature is indicative of its impact on its respective medical specialty. No study has used citation analysis to determine the most influential studies pertaining to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). The primary aims of this study were to identify the classic works in ACL research using citation analysis and to characterize these articles to determine which types of studies have had the most influence on the field. A systematic query of ISI Web of Science (Thomson Reuters, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) was performed for articles pertaining to the ACL, and the 50 most-cited articles were selected for evaluation. The following characteristics were determined for each article: number of citations, citation density, journal, publication year, country of origin, language, article type, article subtype, and level of evidence. The number of citations ranged from 219 to 1073 (mean, 326), and the citation densities ranged from 4.9 to 55.6 citations per year (mean, 18.2). All articles were published in 1 of 11 journals, with the most being published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine (46%) and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American (30%). The most common decades of publication were the 1990s (34%), 1980s (28%), and 2000s (26%). The majority (68%) of articles originated from the United States, and all were written in English. By article type, 42% were basic science, and 58% were clinical. Of the clinical articles, 3% were Level I, 17% were Level II, 28% were Level III, and 52% were Level IV. The articles were heterogeneous with regard to article type, article subtype, and level of evidence and tended to have the following characteristics: high-impact journal of publication, recent publication year, US origin, English language, and low level of evidence. These works represent some of the most popular scientific contributions to ACL research. This list may aid residency and fellowship programs in the compilation of articles for trainee reading curriculums. Copyright 2015, SLACK Incorporated.

How Citation Boosts Promote Scientific Paradigm Shifts and Nobel Prizes

PubMed Central

Mazloumian, Amin; Eom, Young-Ho; Helbing, Dirk; Lozano, Sergi; Fortunato, Santo

2011-01-01

Nobel Prizes are commonly seen to be among the most prestigious achievements of our times. Based on mining several million citations, we quantitatively analyze the processes driving paradigm shifts in science. We find that groundbreaking discoveries of Nobel Prize Laureates and other famous scientists are not only acknowledged by many citations of their landmark papers. Surprisingly, they also boost the citation rates of their previous publications. Given that innovations must outcompete the rich-gets-richer effect for scientific citations, it turns out that they can make their way only through citation cascades. A quantitative analysis reveals how and why they happen. Science appears to behave like a self-organized critical system, in which citation cascades of all sizes occur, from continuous scientific progress all the way up to scientific revolutions, which change the way we see our world. Measuring the “boosting effect” of landmark papers, our analysis reveals how new ideas and new players can make their way and finally triumph in a world dominated by established paradigms. The underlying “boost factor” is also useful to discover scientific breakthroughs and talents much earlier than through classical citation analysis, which by now has become a widespread method to measure scientific excellence, influencing scientific careers and the distribution of research funds. Our findings reveal patterns of collective social behavior, which are also interesting from an attention economics perspective. Understanding the origin of scientific authority may therefore ultimately help to explain how social influence comes about and why the value of goods depends so strongly on the attention they attract. PMID:21573229

How citation boosts promote scientific paradigm shifts and nobel prizes.

PubMed

Mazloumian, Amin; Eom, Young-Ho; Helbing, Dirk; Lozano, Sergi; Fortunato, Santo

2011-05-04

Nobel Prizes are commonly seen to be among the most prestigious achievements of our times. Based on mining several million citations, we quantitatively analyze the processes driving paradigm shifts in science. We find that groundbreaking discoveries of Nobel Prize Laureates and other famous scientists are not only acknowledged by many citations of their landmark papers. Surprisingly, they also boost the citation rates of their previous publications. Given that innovations must outcompete the rich-gets-richer effect for scientific citations, it turns out that they can make their way only through citation cascades. A quantitative analysis reveals how and why they happen. Science appears to behave like a self-organized critical system, in which citation cascades of all sizes occur, from continuous scientific progress all the way up to scientific revolutions, which change the way we see our world. Measuring the "boosting effect" of landmark papers, our analysis reveals how new ideas and new players can make their way and finally triumph in a world dominated by established paradigms. The underlying "boost factor" is also useful to discover scientific breakthroughs and talents much earlier than through classical citation analysis, which by now has become a widespread method to measure scientific excellence, influencing scientific careers and the distribution of research funds. Our findings reveal patterns of collective social behavior, which are also interesting from an attention economics perspective. Understanding the origin of scientific authority may therefore ultimately help to explain how social influence comes about and why the value of goods depends so strongly on the attention they attract.

A study on literature obsolescence and core journals' cost-benefit in citations of the 'Scientific Medical Journal of Ahwaz'.

PubMed

Zare-Farashbandi, Firoozeh; Mohammadi, Parastoo Parsaei

2014-01-01

One of the methods of identifying core and popular resources is by citation evaluation. Using citation evaluation, the librarians of the Acquisition Department can use quantitative methods to indentify core and popular resources among numerous information resources and make serious savings in the library's budget, by acquiring these core resources and eliminating useless ones. The aim of this study is assessing literature obsolescence and core journals' cost-benefit in citations of the 'Scientific Medical Journal of Ahwaz'. This study is a descriptive and cross-sectional survey that uses citation analysis. Sampling is objective sampling from all documents from years 1364 (1985) to 1385 (2006), and the population comprises of 6342 citations of the articles published in 'Scientific Medical Journal of Ahwaz'. Data collection is done through referring to the original documents and the data is analyzed using the Excel software, and for descriptive and analytical statistics the cost-benefit formula and Bradford law formula are used. Findings showed that the average citation for each document in the 'Scientific Medical Journal of Ahwaz' was 15.81. The average citation to international sources was 14.37, and the average citation to national sources was 1.44. The literature obsolescence of Farsi documents in this study was 15 years, while it was equal to 20 years for English documents. The highly cited Farsi journals were (sorted based on citation in descending order): 'Scientific Medical Journal of Ahwaz', 'Daroudarman', 'Nabz,' and 'Journal of Medical School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences'. The highly cited English journals were (sorted based on citation in descending order): 'Pediatrics', 'The New England Journal of Medicine', 'Gastroenterology' and 'Medicine'. All of these four journals are part of the ISI database and have good impact factors in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Also their cost-benefit was reasonable based on the frequency of their use. The authors of the investigated journal were more inclined to use international references. The resources used by the authors of this journal are relatively obsolete and the authors ought to use more up-to-date resources. The subscription for high citation English and Farsi journals is still available in this university. Also the authors of this journal have used accredited ISI journals as their resource, which is a sign of the credibility for the 'Scientific Medical Journal of Ahwaz'.

Temporal Trends (1999-2015) in the Impact Factor of Biomedical Journals Published by US and EU Scientific Societies.

PubMed

Falagas, Matthew E; Kyriakidou, Margarita; Spais, George; Argiti, Efstathia; Vardakas, Konstantinos Z

2018-04-19

The impact factor has emerged as the most popular index of scientific journals' resonance. In this study we aimed to examine the impact factor trends of journals published by scientific bodies in the United States of America (USA) and Europe (EU). We randomly chose 11 categories of Journal of Citation Reports and created three research classes: clinical medicine, laboratory medicine, and basic science. The impact factor values for the years 1999-2015 were abstracted, and the impact factor of US and EU journals was studied through the years. A total of 265 journals were included in the final analysis. The impact factor of US journals was higher than that of EU journals throughout the study period. In addition, for both US and EU journals the median impact factor increased throughout the study period. The rate of annual change in the impact factor throughout the study period was lower for US than EU journals (1.85% versus 3.55%, P=0.019). A higher median annual increase was seen in the impact factor during the period 1999-2008 compared to the period 2009-2015 for both US (P<0.001) and EU (P=0.001) journals. In fact, during the second period the US median impact factor value did not show significant changes (P=0.31), while the EU median impact factor continued to increase (P<0.001). The impact factor of EU journals increased at a significantly higher rate than and approached that of the US journals during the last 16 years.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

NONE

The bibliography contains citations concerning the use of biological agents to control insects and pests. Radiation, genetic breeding, bacteria, fungi, viruses, and pheromones are discussed as alternatives to pesticidal management. Methods for monitoring the effectiveness and environmental impact of these agents are reviewed. Population control of fruit flies, spruce sawflies, flies, mosquitoes, cockroaches, gypsy moths, and other agriculturally-important insects is also discussed. (Contains 50-250 citations and includes a subject term index and title list.) (Copyright NERAC, Inc. 1995)

The Scientific Production of Full Professors of the Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de SÃO Paulo: A View of the Period of 2001–2006

PubMed Central

Cardoso, Suely Campos; Gattás, Gilka Jorge Figaro

2009-01-01

INTRODUCTION The scientific production of institutions of higher education, as well as the dissemination and use of this published work by peer institutions, can be assessed by means of quantitative and qualitative measurements. This type of analysis can also serve as the basis of further academic actions. Variables such as the type of evaluation, the number of faculty members and the decision to include or exclude researchers who are not professors are difficult to measure when comparing different schools and institutions. OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to assess the scientific production of tenured faculty from the Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina performed from 2001 to 2006. METHODS Medline/PubMed database was considered and the Impact factors (IFs - Journal Citation Report, 2006) and the number of generated citations (Web of Science/ISI Thomson) were also evaluated. RESULTS The analysis of the scientific production of 66 full professors (level MS-6) revealed 1,960 scientific articles published in 630 scientific journals, of which 31.3% were Brazilian and 68.7% were from international sources. Among these, 47% of the articles were published in 62.9% of the journals with IFs above 10, although 16.4% of the journals did not have assigned IF values. We verified that 45% of the published articles received 9,335 citations (average of 11 + 17), with the majority of these (8,968 citations) appearing in international scientific journals. CONCLUSIONS Our results indicate that it is possible to analyze the scientific production of a learning institution by the number of papers published by full professors, taking into account not only their academic position and influence, but also the fact that publication is an opportunity to stimulate joint projects with other members of the same institution. PMID:19759885

The scientific production of full professors of the Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo: a view of the period of 2001-2006.

PubMed

Cardoso, Suely Campos; Gattás, Gilka Jorge Figaro

2009-01-01

The scientific production of institutions of higher education, as well as the dissemination and use of this published work by peer institutions, can be assessed by means of quantitative and qualitative measurements. This type of analysis can also serve as the basis of further academic actions. Variables such as the type of evaluation, the number of faculty members and the decision to include or exclude researchers who are not professors are difficult to measure when comparing different schools and institutions. The purpose of this study was to assess the scientific production of tenured faculty from the Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina performed from 2001 to 2006. Medline/PubMed database was considered and the Impact factors (IFs--Journal Citation Report, 2006) and the number of generated citations (Web of Science/ISI Thomson) were also evaluated. The analysis of the scientific production of 66 full professors (level MS-6) revealed 1,960 scientific articles published in 630 scientific journals, of which 31.3% were Brazilian and 68.7% were from international sources. Among these, 47% of the articles were published in 62.9% of the journals with IFs above 10, although 16.4% of the journals did not have assigned IF values. We verified that 45% of the published articles received 9,335 citations (average of 11 + 17), with the majority of these (8,968 citations) appearing in international scientific journals. Our results indicate that it is possible to analyze the scientific production of a learning institution by the number of papers published by full professors, taking into account not only their academic position and influence, but also the fact that publication is an opportunity to stimulate joint projects with other members of the same institution.

And, not or: Quality, quantity in scientific publishing

PubMed Central

Allesina, Stefano

2017-01-01

Scientists often perceive a trade-off between quantity and quality in scientific publishing: finite amounts of time and effort can be spent to produce few high-quality papers or subdivided to produce many papers of lower quality. Despite this perception, previous studies have indicated the opposite relationship, in which productivity (publishing more papers) is associated with increased paper quality (usually measured by citation accumulation). We examine this question in a novel way, comparing members of the National Academy of Sciences with themselves across years, and using a much larger dataset than previously analyzed. We find that a member’s most highly cited paper in a given year has more citations in more productive years than in in less productive years. Their lowest cited paper each year, on the other hand, has fewer citations in more productive years. To disentangle the effect of the underlying distributions of citations and productivities, we repeat the analysis for hypothetical publication records generated by scrambling each author’s citation counts among their publications. Surprisingly, these artificial histories re-create the above trends almost exactly. Put another way, the observed positive relationship between quantity and quality can be interpreted as a consequence of randomly drawing citation counts for each publication: more productive years yield higher-cited papers because they have more chances to draw a large value. This suggests that citation counts, and the rewards that have come to be associated with them, may be more stochastic than previously appreciated. PMID:28570567

Measuring Field-Normalized Impact of Papers on Specific Societal Groups: An Altmetrics Study Based on Mendeley Data

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bornmann, Lutz; Haunschild, Robin

2017-01-01

Bibliometrics is successful in measuring impact because the target is clearly defined: the publishing scientist who is still active and working. Thus, citations are a target-oriented metric which measures impact on science. In contrast, societal impact measurements based on altmetrics are as a rule intended to measure impact in a broad sense on…

Equity impact of interventions and policies to reduce smoking in youth: systematic review.

PubMed

Brown, Tamara; Platt, Stephen; Amos, Amanda

2014-11-01

A systematic review to assess the equity impact of interventions/policies on youth smoking. Biosis, Cinahl, Cochrane Library, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, Embase, Eric, Medline, Psycinfo, Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index and tobacco control experts. Published January 1995 to October 2013. Primary studies of interventions/policies reporting smoking-related outcomes in youth (11-25 years) of lower compared to higher socioeconomic status (SES). References were screened and independently checked. Studies were quality assessed; characteristics and outcomes were extracted. A narrative synthesis by intervention/policy type. Equity impact was assessed as: positive (reduced inequity), neutral (no difference by SES), negative (increased inequity), mixed (equity impact varied) or unclear.Thirty-eight studies of 40 interventions/policies were included: smokefree (12); price/tax (7); mass media campaigns (1); advertising controls (4); access controls (5); school-based programmes (5); multiple policies (3), individual-level cessation support (2), individual-level support for smokefree homes (1). The distribution of equity effects was: 7 positive, 16 neutral, 12 negative, 4 mixed, 1 unclear. All 7 positive equity studies were US-based: price/tax (4), age-of-sales laws (2) and text-messaging cessation support (1). A British school-based intervention (A Stop Smoking in Schools Trial (ASSIST)) showed mixed equity effects (neutral and positive). Most neutral equity studies benefited all SES groups. Very few studies have assessed the equity impact of tobacco control interventions/policies on young people. Price/tax increases had the most consistent positive equity impact. There is a need to strengthen the evidence base for the equity impact of youth tobacco control interventions. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Academic Sell-Out: How an Obsession with Metrics and Rankings Is Damaging Academia

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gruber, Thorsten

2014-01-01

Increasingly, academics have to demonstrate that their research has academic impact. Universities normally use journal rankings and journal impact factors to assess the research impact of individual academics. More recently, citation counts for individual articles and the h-index have also been used to measure the academic impact of academics.…

Predictors of article impact in suicidology: the bereavement literature, a research note.

PubMed

Andriessen, Karl; Krysinska, Karolina; Stack, Steven

2015-02-01

Citation analysis has been neglected in suicidology. The present note applies a mixed-methods approach to both test and suggest hypotheses for the variation in article impact in the bereavement literature. One hundred three articles from three core suicidology journals met the criteria for inclusion in the investigation. Citations to the articles were obtained from the Web of Science. Predictor variables included structural characteristics of the author (e.g., gender) and the article itself (e.g., years since publication). A multivariate regression analysis determined that, controlling for the other variables, the most important predictor of citations was the review article (β = .461), followed by year of publication (β = -.414), the multiauthored article (β = .302), publication in Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior (SLTB) (β = .161), and male gender (β = .156). The 12 most cited articles were published between 1979 and 2004 in SLTB. The majority of these papers was written by males, were U.S. authors, and had more than one author. Four of the most cited articles were reviews. The study concludes that structural characteristics of articles and authors explained 41% of the variance in citations. The qualitative analysis determined that review papers, and papers on characteristics of suicide bereavement and psychological autopsies have been most frequently cited. Replication studies are needed for other subfields of suicidology. © 2014 The American Association of Suicidology.

Authors attain comparable or slightly higher rates of citation publishing in an open access journal (CytoJournal) compared to traditional cytopathology journals - A five year (2007-2011) experience

PubMed Central

Frisch, Nora K.; Nathan, Romil; Ahmed, Yasin K.; Shidham, Vinod B.

2014-01-01

Background: The era of Open Access (OA) publication, a platform which serves to better disseminate scientific knowledge, is upon us, as more OA journals are in existence than ever before. The idea that peer-reviewed OA publication leads to higher rates of citation has been put forth and shown to be true in several publications. This is a significant benefit to authors and is in addition to another relatively less obvious but highly critical component of the OA charter, i.e. retention of the copyright by the authors in the public domain. In this study, we analyzed the citation rates of OA and traditional non-OA publications specifically for authors in the field of cytopathology. Design: We compared the citation patterns for authors who had published in both OA and traditional non-OA peer-reviewed, scientific, cytopathology journals. Citations in an OA publication (CytoJournal) were analyzed comparatively with traditional non-OA cytopathology journals (Acta Cytologica, Cancer Cytopathology, Cytopathology, and Diagnostic Cytopathology) using the data from web of science citation analysis site (based on which the impact factors (IF) are calculated). After comparing citations per publication, as well as a time adjusted citation quotient (which takes into account the time since publication), we also analyzed the statistics after excluding the data for meeting abstracts. Results: Total 28 authors published 314 publications as articles and meeting abstracts (25 authors after excluding the abstracts). The rate of citation and time adjusted citation quotient were higher for OA in the group where abstracts were included (P < 0.05 for both). The rates were also slightly higher for OA than non-OA when the meeting abstracts were excluded, but the difference was statistically insignificant (P = 0.57 and P = 0.45). Conclusion We observed that for the same author, the publications in the OA journal attained a higher rate of citation than the publications in the traditional non-OA journals in the field of cytopathology over a 5 year period (2007-2011). However, this increase was statistically insignificant if the meeting abstracts were excluded from the analysis. Overall, the rates of citation for OA and non-OA were slightly higher to comparable. PMID:24987441

Inequality in societies, academic institutions and science journals: Gini and k-indices

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ghosh, Asim; Chattopadhyay, Nachiketa; Chakrabarti, Bikas K.

2014-09-01

Social inequality is traditionally measured by the Gini-index (g). The g-index takes values from 0 to 1 where g=0 represents complete equality and g=1 represents complete inequality. Most of the estimates of the income or wealth data indicate the g value to be widely dispersed across the countries of the world: g values typically range from 0.30 to 0.65 at a particular time (year). We estimated similarly the Gini-index for the citations earned by the yearly publications of various academic institutions and the science journals. The ISI web of science data suggests remarkably strong inequality and universality (g=0.70±0.07) across all the universities and institutions of the world, while for the journals we find g=0.65±0.15 for any typical year. We define a new inequality measure, namely the k-index, saying that the cumulative income or citations of (1-k) fraction of people or papers exceed those earned by the fraction (k) of the people or publications respectively. We find, while the k-index value for income ranges from 0.60 to 0.75 for income distributions across the world, it has a value around 0.75±0.05 for different universities and institutions across the world and around 0.77±0.10 for the science journals. Apart from above indices, we also analyze the same institution and journal citation data by measuring Pietra index and median index.

"Publish or Perish" as citation metrics used to analyze scientific output in the humanities: International case studies in economics, geography, social sciences, philosophy, and history.

PubMed

Baneyx, Audrey

2008-01-01

Traditionally, the most commonly used source of bibliometric data is the Thomson ISI Web of Knowledge, in particular the (Social) Science Citation Index and the Journal Citation Reports, which provide the yearly Journal Impact Factors. This database used for the evaluation of researchers is not advantageous in the humanities, mainly because books, conference papers, and non-English journals, which are an important part of scientific activity, are not (well) covered. This paper presents the use of an alternative source of data, Google Scholar, and its benefits in calculating citation metrics in the humanities. Because of its broader range of data sources, the use of Google Scholar generally results in more comprehensive citation coverage in the humanities. This presentation compares and analyzes some international case studies with ISI Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar. The fields of economics, geography, social sciences, philosophy, and history are focused on to illustrate the differences of results between these two databases. To search for relevant publications in the Google Scholar database, the use of "Publish or Perish" and of CleanPoP, which the author developed to clean the results, are compared.

Credit where credit is due: indexing and exposing data citations in international data repository networks

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Jones, M. B.; Vieglais, D.; Cruse, P.; Chodacki, J.; Budden, A. E.; Fenner, M.; Lowenberg, D.; Abrams, S.

2017-12-01

Research data are fundamental to the success of the academic enterprise, and yet the practice of citing data in academic and applied works is not widespread among researchers. Researchers need credit for their contributions, and yet current citation infrastructure focuses primarily on citations to research literature. Some citation indiexing systems even systematically exclude citations to data from their corpus. The Making Data Count (MDC) project will enable measuring the impact of research data much as is currently being done with publications, the primary vehicle for scholarly credit and accountability. The MDC team (including the California Digital Library, COUNTER, DataCite, and DataONE) are working together to publish a new COUNTER recommendation on data usage statistics; launch a DataCite-hosted MDC service for aggregated DLM based on the open-source Lagotto platform; and build tools for data repository and discovery services to easily integrate with the new MDC service. In providing such data-level metrics (DLM), the MDC project augments existing measures of scholarly success and so offers an important incentive promoting open data principles and quality research data through adoption of research data management best practices.

[Standardization of the terminology of the academic medical centers and biomedical research centers, in the English language, for journal article sending].

PubMed

Hochman, Bernardo; Locali, Rafael Fagionato; Oliveira Filho, Renato Santos de; Oliveira, Ricardo Leão de; Goldenberg, Saul; Ferreira, Lydia Masako

2006-01-01

To suggest a standardization, in the English language, the formatting of the citation of the research centers. From three more recent publications of the first 20 journals available in Brazilian Portal of Scientific Information - Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES), with bigger factor of impact during the year of 2004, according of information in ISI Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Reports database in biennium 2004-2005, had extracted the formats of citations of the research centers. An analogy to the institutional hierarchie step of the Federal University of Sao Paulo (UNIFESP) was carried out, and the formats most frequent, in the English language, had been adopted as standard to be suggested to cite the research centers for sending articles. In relation to the citation "Departamento", was standardized "Department of ..." (being "..." the name in English of the Department), to the citation "Programa de Pós-Graduação" "... Program", "Disciplina" "Division of ...", "Orgãos, Grupos e Associações" "... Group ", "Setor" "Section of...", "Centro" "Center for ...", "Unidade" "... Unit ", "Instituto" "Institute of ...", "Laboratório" "Laboratory of ..." and "Grupo" "Group of ...".

The effect on collisions with injuries of a reduction in traffic citations issued by police officers.

PubMed

Blais, Etienne; Gagné, Marie-Pier

2010-12-01

To assess the effect on collisions with injuries of a 61% reduction in the number of traffic citations issued by police officers over a 21-month period. Using descriptive analyses as well as ARIMA intervention time-series analyses, this study estimated the impact of this reduction in citations issued for traffic violations on the monthly number of collisions with injuries. Simple descriptive analysis reveals that the 61% reduction in the number of citations issued for traffic violations during the experimental period coincided with an increase in collisions with injuries. Results from the interrupted time-series analyses reveal that, on average, eight additional collisions with injuries occurred every month during which the number of tickets issued for traffic violations was lower than normal. As this pressure tactic was applied for 21 months, it is estimated that this situation was associated with approximately 184 additional collisions with injuries: equivalent to 239 traffic injuries (either deaths, minor or serious injuries). In the province of Quebec, police officers are an important component of road safety policy. Issuing citations prevents drivers from adopting reckless driving habits such as speeding, running red lights and failing to fasten their seat belt.

How Far Has the International Neurourology Journal Progressed Since Its Transformation Into an English Language Journal?

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Purpose The publisher of the International Neurourology Journal changed the text to English in 2010 to promote the journal as an international publication. Four years later, what has happened to this journal? This paper will use citation indicators to describe the degree of internationalization. Methods Citation indicators such as impact factors, total citations from Web of Science, Science Journal Rankings (SJR), cites per documents (2 years), and Hirsch indexes (h-indexes) from Web of Science, digital object identifier (DOI)/CrossRef, ScimagoJR, or Scopus were calculated. In addition, the native countries of the authors and researchers citing the journal in Web of Science were analyzed. Results Impact factors in 2012 and 2013 were 0.645 and 0.857, respectively. Total citations in 2011, 2012, and 2013 from Web of Science were 15, 51, and 99, respectively, and the SJRs in 2011 and 2012 were 0.220 and 0.390, respectively. The h-indexes from DOI/CrossRef, Scopus, and Web of Science were 7, 8, and 6, respectively. Out of 153 unsolicited published papers, 27 (17.6%) were from outside of Korea. The researchers citing the journal in Web of Science and Scopus were primarily from the United States, Korea, China, the United Kingdom, and France. Funding agencies supported 39 of 101 original articles (38.6%). Conclusions After changing the text to the English language, the citation indicators show that the International Neurourology Journal has been elevated to an international journal. Although the nationality of authors varies from year to year, the increase in the number of manuscripts from international authors is obvious. PMID:24729921

Let's Make Data Count

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Budden, A. E.; Abrams, S.; Chodacki, J.; Cruse, P.; Fenner, M.; Jones, M. B.; Lowenberg, D.; Rueda, L.; Vieglais, D.

2017-12-01

The impact of research has traditionally been measured by citations to journal publications and used extensively for evaluation and assessment in academia, but this process misses the impact and reach of data and software as first-class scientific products. For traditional publications, Article-Level Metrics (ALM) capture the multitude of ways in which research is disseminated and used, such as references and citations within social media and other journal articles. Here we present on the extension of usage and citation metrics collection to include other artifacts of research, namely datasets. The Make Data Count (MDC) project will enable measuring the impact of research data in a manner similar to what is currently done with publications. Data-level metrics (DLM) are a multidimensional suite of indicators measuring the broad reach and use of data as legitimate research outputs. By making data metrics openly available for reuse in a number of different ways, the MDC project represents an important first step on the path towards the full integration of data metrics into the research data management ecosystem. By assuring researchers that their contributions to scholarly progress represented by data corpora are acknowledged, data level metrics provide a foundation for streamlining the advancement of knowledge by actively promoting desirable best practices regarding research data management, publication, and sharing.

Scientific publications in critical care medicine journals from East Asia: A 10-year survey of the literature.

PubMed

Cao, Zhenyu; Ou, Chongyang; Teng, Hongfei; Liu, Xiguang; Tang, Hongxin

2016-01-01

The quantity and quality of publications in critical care medicine from East Asia haven't been reported. This study aimed to investigate the contribution of publications from East Asia. Articles from China, Japan and South Korea in 2005 to 2014 were retrieved from Web of Science and Pubmed. The number of publications, impact factor, citation, and article types were analyzed. There were 3076 publications from East Asia (1720 from China, 913 from Japan, and 443 from South Korea). There were a significant decrease in publications from Japan (p = 0.024) and significant increases from China (p = 0.000) and South Korea (p = 0.009). From 2006, the number of articles from China exceed Japan. China had the highest total impact factor (6618.48) and citation (18416), followed by Japan (4566.03; 15440) and South Korea (1998.19; 5599). Japan had the highest mean impact factor (5.00) and citations (16.91), followed by South Korea (4.51; 12.64) and China (3.85; 10.71). China and South Korea`s contributions to critical care medicine had significant increases during the past 10 years, while Japan had a significant decrease. China was the most productive region in East Asia since 2006. Japan had the highest quality research output.

Bibliometry of the Revista de Biología Tropical / International Journal of Tropical Biology and Conservation: document types, languages, countries, institutions, citations and article lifespan.

PubMed

Monge-Nájera, Julián; Ho, Yuh-Shan

2016-09-01

The Revista de Biología Tropical / International Journal of Tropical Biology and Conservation, founded in 1953, publishes feature articles about tropical nature and is considered one of the leading journals in Latin America. This article analyzes document type, language, countries, institutions, citations and for the first time article lifespan, from 1976 through 2014. We analyzed 3 978 documents from the Science Citation Index Expanded. Articles comprised 88 % of the total production and had 3.7 citations on average, lower than reviews. Spanish and English articles were nearly equal in numbers and citation for English articles was only slightly higher. Costa Rica, Mexico, and the USA are the countries with more articles, and the leading institutions were Universidad de Costa Rica, Universidad Nacional, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico and Universidad de Oriente (Venezuela). The citation lifespan of articles is long, around 37 years. It is not surprising that Costa Rica, Mexico, and Venezuela lead in productivity and cooperation, because they are mostly covered by tropical ecosystems and share a common culture and a tradition of scientific cooperation. The same applies to the leading institutions, which are among the largest Spanish language universities in the neotropical region. American output can be explained by the regional presence of the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute and the Organization for Tropical Studies. Tropical research does not have the rapid change typical of medical research, and for this reason, the impact factor misses most of citations for the Revista, which are made after the two-year window used by the Web of Science. This issue is especially damaging for the Revista because most journals that deal with tropical biology are never checked when citations are counted for by the Science Citation Index.

Spinal cord injury: a review of the most-cited publications.

PubMed

Nowrouzi, Behdin; Assan-Lebbe, Aisha; Sharma, Bhanu; Casole, Jennifer; Nowrouzi-Kia, Behnam

2017-01-01

The objective of this study was to identify and review the most-cited articles on spinal cord injury (SCI). Citation analyses showcase the relative influence of individual articles in a given field. In addition to distinguishing publications of particular quality and impact and well-developed areas of the literature, citation analyses allow for an understanding of the direction in which a field of research is headed. A multi-disciplinary bibliographic index was used to identify the 50 SCI articles with the most lifetime citations, and the 50 SCI articles with the highest annual citation rates. Studies were categorized into one of six categories based on their primary focus: treatment, pathology/natural history, predictor of outcome, methods, epidemiology, or assessment measure. We report that 40.0 and 56.0 % of SCI papers with the most lifetime citations and highest annual citation rates, respectively, were systematic reviews or meta-analyses, indicating that some of the most referenced papers in SCI are not primary publications. Further, there appears to be a greater international presence in SCI research. In the highest annual citation rate cohort, 14.0 % of papers were a product of international collaboration, 50.0 % were published by outside of the United States, and the average year of publication was 2005 ± 5.4; the comparable numbers for papers that comprised the highest lifetime citation cohort were, respectively, 8.0, 28.0 %, and 1998 ± 9.2. Treatment and pathology/natural history of SCI were a common research focus in both citation cohorts, consistent with ongoing efforts to better understand and manage this injury. This comprehensive review provides a cross-sectional summary and bibliometric analysis of some of the most influential literature in SCI, and compliments existing systematic reviews and meta-analysis in the field by establishing which areas of the literature are growing and which have been well developed.

A comparison of citations across multidisciplinary psychology journals: a case study of two independent journals.

PubMed

Schumm, Walter R

2010-02-01

Citation rates and impact factors are often used in an attempt to evaluate the apparent prestige of scholarly journals and the quality of research published by individual scholars. However, the apparent prestige of "top tier" journals may reflect aggressive marketing and advertising efforts as much as scholarship. Some journals have retained their independence from professional organizations and the funding, marketing, and advocacy policies that may be associated with such organizations. While lacking as much visibility as organizational journals and sometimes considered "lower tier," independent journals may be able to provide comparable scientific quality as measured by citation rates. To test this, the citation rates of 169 articles published by a frequently cited scholar were compared across first- and second-tier journals, including many sponsored and marketed by large professional organizations, and to rates for two independent journals combined, Psychological Reports and Perceptual and Motor Skills. Citation rates were higher for first-tier journals but for most comparisons, especially those that controlled for heterogeneity of variance, results did not differ in statistically significant ways among the three tiers of journals, though some nonsignificant trends (p < .15) were found. If citation rates of articles are any indication of scientific quality, tiered classifications of journals appear to be a relatively weak indicator of scientific merit; journals at any tier contain articles that are useful and of good quality.

Research trends on pathogenic Cryptococcus species in the last 20 years: a global analysis with focus on Brazil.

PubMed

Albuquerque, Priscila C; Rodrigues, Marcio L

2012-03-01

Recent data demonstrates that cryptococcosis caused by Cryptococcus neoformans or Cryptococcus gattii kills approximately 600,000 people per year in the world. In Brazil, cryptococcosis has recently been identified as the most fatal mycosis in AIDS patients. In this study, we aimed to map research into C. neoformans and C. gattii in the world, with a focus on the Brazilian contribution to this area. The parameters used for this analysis were based on publication records, including number of articles published, citation indices, journal impact factor and distribution of authorship in the last two decades. Our global analysis of publications demonstrated that, in the last 20 years, the USA was the country that produced the highest number of scientific articles in the Cryptococcus field, while Brazil occupied the third position. Brazilian productivity, however, showed a steady tendency to increase, in contrast to the USA and other countries. The average impact factor of journals at which articles authored by Brazilians were published was 2.58, which represented approximately half the value found for papers of American authorship. Studies authored by Brazilian scientists showed relatively low averages of citations per article, in comparison to papers published by researchers from the USA, France, Australia, The Netherlands and Germany, among others. This study demonstrates that the contribution of Brazilian scientists to the Cryptococcus field is continually growing, although papers produced in Brazil apparently have poor repercussion in comparison to those generated in developed countries.

Examining the Impact of the National Institutes of Health Public Access Policy on the Citation Rates of Journal Articles

PubMed Central

De Groote, Sandra L.; Shultz, Mary; Smalheiser, Neil R.

2015-01-01

Purpose To examine whether National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded articles that were archived in PubMed Central (PMC) after the release of the 2008 NIH Public Access Policy show greater scholarly impact than comparable articles not archived in PMC. Methods A list of journals across several subject areas was developed from which to collect article citation data. Citation information and cited reference counts of the articles published in 2006 and 2009 from 122 journals were obtained from the Scopus database. The articles were separated into categories of NIH funded, non-NIH funded and whether they were deposited in PubMed Central. An analysis of citation data across a five-year timespan was performed on this set of articles. Results A total of 45,716 articles were examined, including 7,960 with NIH-funding. An analysis of the number of times these articles were cited found that NIH-funded 2006 articles in PMC were not cited significantly more than NIH-funded non-PMC articles. However, 2009 NIH funded articles in PMC were cited 26% more than 2009 NIH funded articles not in PMC, 5 years after publication. This result is highly significant even after controlling for journal (as a proxy of article quality and topic). Conclusion Our analysis suggests that factors occurring between 2006 and 2009 produced a subsequent boost in scholarly impact of PubMed Central. The 2008 Public Access Policy is likely to be one such factor, but others may have contributed as well (e.g., growing size and visibility of PMC, increasing availability of full-text linkouts from PubMed, and indexing of PMC articles by Google Scholar). PMID:26448551

Three decades of citation classics: the most cited articles in the field of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

PubMed

Powell, Aaron J; Conlee, Erin M; Chang, Douglas G

2014-09-01

With the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation recently celebrating its 75th anniversary, it is an opportune time to assess the impact and influence that physiatric articles and research have had on the field, as well as the greater scientific community. One useful metric of scientific impact is citation count, which is the most common method for analyzing the magnitude of scientific recognition of an individual article. This study presents 2 reading lists of influential physiatric academic journal articles drawn from the Web of Science index based on citation count. The first list contains the top 25 most-cited articles during the last 3 decades from the American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, the Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, and PM&R. The second list contains the top 10 articles in 20 different physiatric topical areas. This topical list was generated via an expanded search without limitation of time span or journal. This allowed for the identification of influential physiatric articles not found in the field's 3 major publications from the United States. Although citation index is not a direct measure of quality or importance, it offers one form of quantitative assessment of scientific impact. This assessment contributes to the identification of trends, which illustrate the evolution of scope and focus of physiatry research. The lists of most-cited articles presented in this review can be used to provide historical context to physiatry's existing body of research, direct future evidence-based research efforts, and help guide educators as they select resident reading lists or journal club materials. Copyright © 2014 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

An appraisal of the utility or futility of ENT consultant postal questionnaires.

PubMed

Ryan, Stephen; Saunders, J; Clarke, E; Fenton, J E

2013-03-01

Despite an increase in ENT postal questionnaires, the quality of their methodology has been questioned (Ramphul et al. in J Laryngol Otol 119:175-178, 1). This retrospective study examined whether quality and utility of such questionnaires published since 2005 has improved. Seventeen consultant postal questionnaires published between 2005 and 2012 were reviewed. Quality of questionnaires was assessed using a 30-point score based on compliance with 15 criteria previously established to evaluate postal questionnaire study-design (Ramphul et al. in J Laryngol Otol 119:175-178, 1). Citation rates were used as an indicator of utility. The specific comments made in each citing paper was reviewed providing information on whether questionnaire findings (a) had an impact on clinical practice, (b) were the citing comments positive, (c) negative or (d) non-specific. Recurrent methodological flaws were identified in all questionnaires. The average score assigned was 44 %, versus 32 % previously reported (Ramphul et al. in J Laryngol Otol 119:175-178, 1) (P < 0.01, Student's t test). The low citation rate demonstrates poor utility for postal questionnaires. Citations were general non-specific referencing with no clear indication that questionnaire findings positively impacted clinical practice. In conclusion, although the quality of ENT postal questionnaire has improved since the original study (Ramphul et al. in J Laryngol Otol 119:175-178, 1), important recurring methodological flaws still exist. The poor utility, based on low citation rates, also reflects the continued deficiencies in design quality. It is recommended that authors of questionnaire-based research should ensure that guidelines for questionnaire design are adhered in order to improve the validity of findings and hence impact on clinical practice.

Inappropriate use of standard error of the mean when reporting variability of study samples: a critical evaluation of four selected journals of obstetrics and gynecology.

PubMed

Ko, Wen-Ru; Hung, Wei-Te; Chang, Hui-Chin; Lin, Long-Yau

2014-03-01

The study was designed to investigate the frequency of misusing standard error of the mean (SEM) in place of standard deviation (SD) to describe study samples in four selected journals published in 2011. Citation counts of articles and the relationship between the misuse rate and impact factor, immediacy index, or cited half-life were also evaluated. All original articles in the four selected journals published in 2011 were searched for descriptive statistics reporting with either mean ± SD or mean ± SEM. The impact factor, immediacy index, and cited half-life of the journals were gathered from Journal Citation Reports Science edition 2011. Scopus was used to search for citations of individual articles. The difference in citation counts between the SD group and SEM group was tested by the Mann-Whitney U test. The relationship between the misuse rate and impact factor, immediacy index, or cited half-life was also evaluated. The frequency of inappropriate reporting of SEM was 13.60% for all four journals. For individual journals, the misuse rate was from 2.9% in Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica to 22.68% in American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. Articles using SEM were cited more frequently than those using SD (p = 0.025). An approximate positive correlation between the misuse rate and cited half-life was observed. Inappropriate reporting of SEM is common in medical journals. Authors of biomedical papers should be responsible for maintaining an integrated statistical presentation because valuable articles are in danger of being wasted through the misuse of statistics. Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Mapping longitudinal scientific progress, collaboration and impact of the Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative.

PubMed

Yao, Xiaohui; Yan, Jingwen; Ginda, Michael; Börner, Katy; Saykin, Andrew J; Shen, Li

2017-01-01

Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative (ADNI) is a landmark imaging and omics study in AD. ADNI research literature has increased substantially over the past decade, which poses challenges for effectively communicating information about the results and impact of ADNI-related studies. In this work, we employed advanced information visualization techniques to perform a comprehensive and systematic mapping of the ADNI scientific growth and impact over a period of 12 years. Citation information of ADNI-related publications from 01/01/2003 to 05/12/2015 were downloaded from the Scopus database. Five fields, including authors, years, affiliations, sources (journals), and keywords, were extracted and preprocessed. Statistical analyses were performed on basic publication data as well as journal and citations information. Science mapping workflows were conducted using the Science of Science (Sci2) Tool to generate geospatial, topical, and collaboration visualizations at the micro (individual) to macro (global) levels such as geospatial layouts of institutional collaboration networks, keyword co-occurrence networks, and author collaboration networks evolving over time. During the studied period, 996 ADNI manuscripts were published across 233 journals and conference proceedings. The number of publications grew linearly from 2008 to 2015, so did the number of involved institutions. ADNI publications received much more citations than typical papers from the same set of journals. Collaborations were visualized at multiple levels, including authors, institutions, and research areas. The evolution of key ADNI research topics was also plotted over the studied period. Both statistical and visualization results demonstrate the increasing attention of ADNI research, strong citation impact of ADNI publications, the expanding collaboration networks among researchers, institutions and ADNI core areas, and the dynamic evolution of ADNI research topics. The visualizations presented here can help improve daily decision making based on a deep understanding of existing patterns and trends using proven and replicable data analysis and visualization methods. They have great potential to provide new insights and actionable knowledge for helping translational research in AD.

Mapping longitudinal scientific progress, collaboration and impact of the Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative

PubMed Central

Yao, Xiaohui; Yan, Jingwen; Ginda, Michael; Börner, Katy; Saykin, Andrew J.

2017-01-01

Background Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative (ADNI) is a landmark imaging and omics study in AD. ADNI research literature has increased substantially over the past decade, which poses challenges for effectively communicating information about the results and impact of ADNI-related studies. In this work, we employed advanced information visualization techniques to perform a comprehensive and systematic mapping of the ADNI scientific growth and impact over a period of 12 years. Methods Citation information of ADNI-related publications from 01/01/2003 to 05/12/2015 were downloaded from the Scopus database. Five fields, including authors, years, affiliations, sources (journals), and keywords, were extracted and preprocessed. Statistical analyses were performed on basic publication data as well as journal and citations information. Science mapping workflows were conducted using the Science of Science (Sci2) Tool to generate geospatial, topical, and collaboration visualizations at the micro (individual) to macro (global) levels such as geospatial layouts of institutional collaboration networks, keyword co-occurrence networks, and author collaboration networks evolving over time. Results During the studied period, 996 ADNI manuscripts were published across 233 journals and conference proceedings. The number of publications grew linearly from 2008 to 2015, so did the number of involved institutions. ADNI publications received much more citations than typical papers from the same set of journals. Collaborations were visualized at multiple levels, including authors, institutions, and research areas. The evolution of key ADNI research topics was also plotted over the studied period. Conclusions Both statistical and visualization results demonstrate the increasing attention of ADNI research, strong citation impact of ADNI publications, the expanding collaboration networks among researchers, institutions and ADNI core areas, and the dynamic evolution of ADNI research topics. The visualizations presented here can help improve daily decision making based on a deep understanding of existing patterns and trends using proven and replicable data analysis and visualization methods. They have great potential to provide new insights and actionable knowledge for helping translational research in AD. PMID:29095836

Scientific publications in nursing journals from Mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong: a 10-year survey of the literature.

PubMed

Zhang, Di; Wang, Xiaming; Yuan, Xueru; Yang, Li; Xue, Yu; Xie, Qian

2016-01-01

China has witnessed remarkable progress in scientific performance in recent years. However, the quantity and quality of nursing publications from three major regions (Mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong) have not been reported. This study aimed to investigate the characteristics of scientific research productivity from Mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong in the field of nursing. Articles published in the 110 nursing journals originating from Mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong between 2005 and 2014 were retrieved from the Web of Science. The total number of articles published, the impact factor, and the citation count were analyzed. There were 2,439 publications between 2005 and 2014 from China, including 438 from Mainland China, 1,506 from Taiwan, and 495 from Hong Kong. There was a significant increase in publications for these three regions (p < 0.05), especially for Mainland China, with a 59.50-fold increase experienced. From 2011, the number of publications from Mainland China exceeded that from Hong Kong. Taiwan had the highest total journal impact factor (2,142.81), followed by Hong Kong (720.39) and Mainland China (583.94). The mean journal impact factor from Hong Kong (1.46) was higher than that from Taiwan (1.42) and Mainland China (1.33). Taiwan had the highest total citation count (8,392), followed by Hong Kong (3,785) and Mainland China (1,493). The mean citation count from Hong Kong (7.65) was higher than that from Taiwan (5.57) and Mainland China (3.41). The Journal of Clinical Nursing was the most popular journal in the three regions. Chinese contributions to the field of nursing have significantly increased in the past ten years, particularly from Mainland China. Taiwan is the most productive region in China. Hong Kong had the highest-quality research output, according to mean journal impact factor and mean citation count.

Evaluation and Ranking of Researchers – Bh Index

PubMed Central

Bharathi, D. Gnana

2013-01-01

Evaluation and ranking of every author is very crucial as it is widely used to evaluate the performance of the researcher. This article proposes a new method, called Bh-Index, to evaluate the researchers based on the publications and citations. The method is built on h-Index and only the h-core articles are taken into consideration. The method assigns value additions to those articles that receive significantly high citations in comparison to the h-Index of the researcher. It provides a wide range of values for a given h-Index and effective evaluation even for a short period. Use of Bh-Index along with the h-Index gives a powerful tool to evaluate the researchers. PMID:24349183

The 100 Most Cited Articles in Facial Trauma: A Bibliometric Analysis.

PubMed

Tahim, Arpan; Patel, Kush; Bridle, Christopher; Holmes, Simon

2016-11-01

The number of citations an article receives has been used as a marker of its influence within a surgical specialty. Currently, there is limited citation analysis in oral and maxillofacial trauma surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine the 100 most cited articles in facial trauma surgery and their characteristics. Articles were identified from the Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information using the Thomson Reuters Web of Science search engine. All articles until 2015 were included. Then, the 100 most cited articles were assessed for title, author, journal, country of origin, and number of citations. A citation index (number of citations received per year) also was calculated. The 100 most cited articles in facial trauma received 9,933 citations (range, 66 to 297). They were published from 1942 through 2008, with 1990 through 1999 being the commonest decade. Articles were cited on average 4.6 times per year. Articles were published in 28 different journals, with impact factors ranging from 0.94 to 35.3. Most articles were observational research studies. These findings reflect the attention that articles have received during the past half century in oral and maxillofacial trauma research, shedding light on often-read articles in this field. In addition to current bibliometric indices, it could provide a useful evidence base for facial surgeons, represent key educational material for aspiring trainees, and be used to help guide future research efforts. Copyright © 2016 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Open access to journal articles in dentistry: Prevalence and citation impact.

PubMed

Hua, Fang; Sun, Heyuan; Walsh, Tanya; Worthington, Helen; Glenny, Anne-Marie

2016-04-01

To investigate the current prevalence of open access (OA) in the field of dentistry, the means used to provide OA, as well as the association between OA and citation counts. PubMed was searched for dental articles published in 2013. The OA status of each article was determined by manually checking Google, Google Scholar, PubMed and ResearchGate. Citation data were extracted from Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Chi-square tests were used to compare the OA prevalence by different subjects, study types, and continents of origin. The association between OA and citation count was studied with multivariable logistic regression analyses. A random sample of 908 articles was deemed eligible and therefore included. Among these, 416 were found freely available online, indicating an overall OA rate of 45.8%. Significant difference in OA rate was detected among articles in different subjects (P<0.001) and among those from different continents (P<0.001). Of articles that were OA, 74.2% were available via self-archiving ('Green road' OA), 53.3% were available from publishers ('Gold road' OA). According to multivariable logistic regression analyses, OA status was not significantly associated with either the existence of citation (P=0.37) or the level of citation (P=0.52). In the field of dentistry, 54% of recent journal articles are behind the paywall (non-OA) one year after their publication dates. The 'Green road' of providing OA was more common than the 'Gold road'. No evidence suggested that OA articles received significantly more citations than non-OA articles. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Building a List of Journals with Constructed Impact Factors.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Stegmann, Johannes

1999-01-01

Describes the building of a list of constructed-impact factors (CIF) for biomedical journals not included in the 1996 editions of the "Journal Citation Reports." The online retrieval from the host DIMDI of the data needed for impact-factor calculation is described. The top 100 (of 338 titles, ranked according to their CIFs) are…

The Status of Cognitive Psychology Journals: An Impact Factor Approach

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Togia, Aspasia

2013-01-01

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact factor of cognitive psychology journals indexed in the Science and Social Sciences edition of "Journal Citation Reports" ("JCR") database over a period of 10 consecutive years. Cognitive psychology journals were indexed in 11 different subject categories of the database. Their mean impact factor…

A systematic assessment of Cochrane reviews and systematic reviews published in high-impact medical journals related to cancer.

PubMed

Goldkuhle, Marius; Narayan, Vikram M; Weigl, Aaron; Dahm, Philipp; Skoetz, Nicole

2018-03-25

To compare cancer-related systematic reviews (SRs) published in the Cochrane Database of SRs (CDSR) and high-impact journals, with respect to type, content, quality and citation rates. Methodological SR with assessment and comparison of SRs and meta-analyses. Two authors independently assessed methodological quality using an Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)-based extraction form. Both authors independently screened search results, extracted content-relevant characteristics and retrieved citation numbers of the included reviews using the Clarivate Analytics Web of Science database. Cancer-related SRs were retrieved from the CDSR, as well as from the 10 journals which publish oncological SRs and had the highest impact factors, using a comprehensive search in both the CDSR and MEDLINE. We included all cancer-related SRs and meta-analyses published from January 2011 to May 2016. Methodological SRs were excluded. We included 346 applicable Cochrane reviews and 215 SRs from high-impact journals. Cochrane reviews consistently met more individual AMSTAR criteria, notably with regard to an a priori design (risk ratio (RR) 3.89; 95% CI 3.10 to 4.88), inclusion of the grey literature and trial registries (RR 3.52; 95% CI 2.84 to 4.37) in their searches, and the reporting of excluded studies (RR 8.80; 95% CI 6.06 to 12.78). Cochrane reviews were less likely to address questions of prognosis (RR 0.04; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.09), use individual patient data (RR 0.03; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.09) or be based on non-randomised controlled trials (RR 0.04; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.09). Citation rates of Cochrane reviews were notably lower than those for high-impact journals (Cochrane reviews: mean number of citations 6.52 (range 0-143); high-impact journal SRs: 74.45 (0-652)). When comparing cancer-related SRs published in the CDSR versus those published in high-impact medical journals, Cochrane reviews were consistently of higher methodological quality, but cited less frequently. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

A historical review of classic articles in surgery field.

PubMed

Long, Xiao; Huang, Jiu-Zuo; Ho, Yuh-Shan

2014-11-01

Surgery is one of the most rapidly developing specialties in the past century. Diagnostic methods, operation technique, and knowledge of the diseases are changing continuously. In the academic history, lots of classic papers brought advances for surgery. They were accepted and cited numerously by the medical specialists all over the world. Citation analysis reflects the recognition a work has received in the scientific community by its peers. The articles in the field of surgery have been cited at least 1,000 times since its publication to 2011 were analyzed. By categorizing the publication year, journals, authors, institutions, countries, life citation cycles, level of evidence provided, and characteristics of the topmost articles, we intended to determine what qualities make the articles important to the specialty. The methodology used in this study was based on the Science Citation Index Expanded database of Web of Science from Thomson Reuters. According to Journal Citation Reports of 2011, it indexes 8,336 journals with citation references across 176Web of Science categories in science edition. Level of evidence of these articles was graded according to the standard provided by Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Totally 36 articles have been cited at least 1,000 times since their publication to the year 2011. According to their citation histories, 35 articles were further evaluated. These topmost articles covered 8 subspecialties of surgery and were published in 17 journals. The publication year varied from 1940 to 1999 and the articles provided different level of evidence, most of which are retrospective studies of case series. Six articles were research articles including animal model, histology analysis, and laboratory research. The others were clinical articles. From the results of citation analysis, the classic articles are not always in top citations. In addition, some of these articles have no citations after several years post their publication. The introduction of a commonly used classification or scoring system is a major factor in propelling citation by other authors. The most cited articles in surgery present their long academic life in spite of their level of evidence and journal impact factor in which they were published. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Are Quantitative Measures of Academic Productivity Correlated with Academic Rank in Plastic Surgery? A National Study.

PubMed

Susarla, Srinivas M; Lopez, Joseph; Swanson, Edward W; Miller, Devin; O'Brien-Coon, Devin; Zins, James E; Serletti, Joseph M; Yaremchuk, Michael J; Manson, Paul N; Gordon, Chad R

2015-09-01

The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation between quantitative measures of academic productivity and academic rank among full-time academic plastic surgeons. Bibliometric indices were computed for all full-time academic plastic surgeons in the United States. The primary study variable was academic rank. Bibliometric predictors included the Hirsch index, I-10 index, number of publications, number of citations, and highest number of citations for a single publication. Descriptive, bivariate, and correlation analyses were computed. Multiple comparisons testing was used to calculate adjusted associations for subgroups. For all analyses, a value of p < 0.05 was considered significant. The cohort consisted of 607 plastic surgeons across 91 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-approved programs. Of them, 4.1 percent were instructors/lecturers, 43.7 percent were assistant professors, 22.1 percent were associate professors, 25.7 percent were professors, and 4.4 percent were endowed professors. Mean values were as follows: Hirsch index, 10.2 ± 9.0; I-10 index, 17.2 ± 10.2; total number of publications, 45.5 ± 69.4; total number of citations, 725.0 ± 1448.8; and highest number of citations for a single work, 117.8 ± 262.4. Correlation analyses revealed strong associations of the Hirsch index, I-10 index, number of publications, and number of citations with academic rank (rs = 0.62 to 0.64; p < 0.001). Academic rank in plastic surgery is strongly correlated with several quantitative metrics of research productivity. Although academic promotion is the result of success in multiple different areas, bibliometric measures may be useful adjuncts for assessment of research productivity.

Selected Translated Abstracts of Chinese-Language Climate Change Publications

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Cushman, R.M.; Burtis, M.D.

1999-05-01

This report contains English-translated abstracts of important Chinese-language literature concerning global climate change for the years 1995-1998. This body of literature includes the topics of adaptation, ancient climate change, climate variation, the East Asia monsoon, historical climate change, impacts, modeling, and radiation and trace-gas emissions. In addition to the biological citations and abstracts translated into English, this report presents the original citations and abstracts in Chinese. Author and title indexes are included to assist the reader in locating abstracts of particular interest.

The Meta-Analytic Big Bang

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Shadish, William R.; Lecy, Jesse D.

2015-01-01

This article looks at the impact of meta-analysis and then explores why meta-analysis was developed at the time and by the scholars it did in the social sciences in the 1970s. For the first problem, impact, it examines the impact of meta-analysis using citation network analysis. The impact is seen in the sciences, arts and humanities, and on such…

Temporal Trends (1999–2015) in the Impact Factor of Biomedical Journals Published by US and EU Scientific Societies

PubMed Central

Falagas, Matthew E.; Kyriakidou, Margarita; Spais, George; Argiti, Efstathia; Vardakas, Konstantinos Z.

2018-01-01

Objective The impact factor has emerged as the most popular index of scientific journals’ resonance. In this study we aimed to examine the impact factor trends of journals published by scientific bodies in the United States of America (USA) and Europe (EU). Methods We randomly chose 11 categories of Journal of Citation Reports and created three research classes: clinical medicine, laboratory medicine, and basic science. The impact factor values for the years 1999–2015 were abstracted, and the impact factor of US and EU journals was studied through the years. Results A total of 265 journals were included in the final analysis. The impact factor of US journals was higher than that of EU journals throughout the study period. In addition, for both US and EU journals the median impact factor increased throughout the study period. The rate of annual change in the impact factor throughout the study period was lower for US than EU journals (1.85% versus 3.55%, P=0.019). A higher median annual increase was seen in the impact factor during the period 1999–2008 compared to the period 2009–2015 for both US (P<0.001) and EU (P=0.001) journals. In fact, during the second period the US median impact factor value did not show significant changes (P=0.31), while the EU median impact factor continued to increase (P<0.001). Conclusion The impact factor of EU journals increased at a significantly higher rate than and approached that of the US journals during the last 16 years. PMID:29517962

[An analysis of Spanish biomedical journals by the impact factor].

PubMed

Baños, J E; Casanovas, L; Guardiola, E; Bosch, F

1992-06-13

One of the most frequently used parameters for evaluating scientific publications is that of impact factor (IF) published in the Science Citation Index-Journal Citation Reports (SCI-JCR) which evaluates the number of citations a journal receives on behalf of other journals. The present study analyzed the Spanish biomedical journals included in the SCI-JCR by the IF. The IF were obtained from the SCI-JCR (1980-89). The journals were evaluated by the IF and the weighted impact factor (WIF) calculated according to WIF = (IF/MIF) x 100 in which MIF = maximum IF of the considered area. Nine Spanish biomedical journals were included in the SCI-JCR, four being basic sciences (Histology and Histopathology, Inmunología, Methods and Findings in Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, Revista Española de Fisiología) and five clinical journals (Allergologia et Immunopathologia, Medicina Clínica, Nefrología, Revista Española de las Enfermedades del Aparato Digestivo, Revista Clínica Española). Their IF were much lower than the most important journals in each area with the mean (+/- standard deviation) being 0.21 +/- 0.22 (range 0.016-0.627). The mean WIF was 2.88 +/- 4.07 (0.16-12.82). The journals of basic sciences had higher IF and WIF than the clinical journals (p less than 0.05). Only the four journals of basic sciences were included in the SCI. Four journals, those of basic sciences, are preferentially or exclusively published in English and other five are published in Spanish. The differences in IF among these groups were not significant (p = 0.06) while those of WIF were significant (p less than 0.05). The number of Spanish biomedical journals in the SCI-JCR has risen from 1 in 1980 to 9 in 1989 with IF which have evolved variably. In mind of impact factor, the contribution of Spanish journals is low, with that of biomedical sciences being higher than that of clinical journals. Language and inclusion in the Science Citation Index may explain, at least in part, the low impact factors obtained.

[International visibility and impact of the Spanish research on prison health (2002-2011)].

PubMed

Ruíz-Pérez, R; Robinson-García, N

2013-01-01

This paper sets out to analyze the dissemination and impact of Spanish research published in international scientific journals on Prison Health over the last decade. Descriptive, longitudinal and retrospective analysis of scientific output. We used the Medline-Pubmed database as an information resource. We focus on the bibliometric aspects of journals, papers and authors using the indicators offered by the Web of Science, the Journal Citation Reports and the Essential Science Indicators. We identify the output of Spanish researchers, journals in which they are published, authors and main research fields. From 2002 to 2011, Spanish researchers published 159 papers, that is, nearly 2% of the world's share in Prison Health. The publication profile is mainly in international journals with an average impact on JCR. The Revista Española de Sanidad Penitenciaria is the most productive journal (9.09%), although its role is not prominent. Only two authors can be considered as medium-high productive authors with 10 papers in the study time period. The co-authors network shows a dense network with 14 authors along with minor fragmented networks. As regards citations, 6 papers have been cited 15 or more times and only two can be considered as highly cited. Three main research fronts have been identified: infectious diseases, drugs and psychiatric-psychological problems. The Spanish research production on Prison Health represents a similar share of the world output similar to that of other disciplines (1.9%), although slightly lower (General Medicine represents 3.05%; Public Health, 2.38%; Psychiatry, 2.29%; Toxicology, 2.46%). It seems likely that this share will increase as a result of the inclusion of its main journal in Medline along with an increasing number of researchers working on this discipline at an international level. However, inclusion has not yet led to integration into high-impact journals or a larger number of citations. The average Journal Impact Factor is relatively low (2.062) and few papers are published in first-class journals (Q1). There are few articles with a good citation average according to the discipline's standard. Likewise, the collaboration pattern still shows a poor state for Spanish research on Prison Health.

[Bibliometry of collaboration and impact of the Revista de Biología Tropical (Web of Science 2003-2012)].

PubMed

De Filippo, Daniela; Córdoba González, Saray; Sanz-Casado, Elías

2016-03-01

The activity analysis of a scientific journal is relevant to know the evolution of its characteristics over time. In this paper, results of a bibliometric study of the Revista de Biología Tropical/International Journal of Tropical Biology and Conservation (Costa Rica) are presented. The goal of this study was to describe the main characteristics of its scientific production, and analyze its level of collaboration and its impact between the years 2003-2012. Data was derived from the Web of Science (Thomson-Reuters), and the relationship among authors and coauthors, institutions and countries, and their links with the citations received were analyzed for that period. Descriptive statistics about production (number of documents per year, institution and country), collaboration (authorship index, collaboration among institutions and countries) and impact (IF, position in JCR and number of citations received) were collected. Results showed that the journal has published 1 473 papers in this period, in similar proportions English and Spanish. Mexico, Costa Rica, Venezuela and Colombia are the most common countries of origin, with the Universidad of Costa Rica, Universidad Autónoma de Mexico and the University of Puerto Rico as the most common leader institutions. Collaboration between authors, institutions and countries has shown an increasing trend over the last decade. The co-author index was 3.07 per document, 63 % of publications included 2 or more institutions, and 22 % of the papers were product of international collaboration. The most common collaboration link was between Costa Rica and the United States of America. The impact factor has been oscillating during this last decade, reaching a maximum in 2012 (IF JCR = 0.553). Besides, 10 % of the most cited papers concentrated half of the citations received by the journal, and have a very high number of citations, compared with the journal mean. The main countries that cite the journal were USA, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina and Costa Rica. Data showed an increasing collaboration between authors, institutions and countries, and a direct relationship between the increase of this collaboration and the received impact.

Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background In the past few years there has been an ongoing debate as to whether the proliferation of open access (OA) publishing would damage the peer review system and put the quality of scientific journal publishing at risk. Our aim was to inform this debate by comparing the scientific impact of OA journals with subscription journals, controlling for journal age, the country of the publisher, discipline and (for OA publishers) their business model. Methods The 2-year impact factors (the average number of citations to the articles in a journal) were used as a proxy for scientific impact. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) was used to identify OA journals as well as their business model. Journal age and discipline were obtained from the Ulrich's periodicals directory. Comparisons were performed on the journal level as well as on the article level where the results were weighted by the number of articles published in a journal. A total of 610 OA journals were compared with 7,609 subscription journals using Web of Science citation data while an overlapping set of 1,327 OA journals were compared with 11,124 subscription journals using Scopus data. Results Overall, average citation rates, both unweighted and weighted for the number of articles per journal, were about 30% higher for subscription journals. However, after controlling for discipline (medicine and health versus other), age of the journal (three time periods) and the location of the publisher (four largest publishing countries versus other countries) the differences largely disappeared in most subcategories except for journals that had been launched prior to 1996. OA journals that fund publishing with article processing charges (APCs) are on average cited more than other OA journals. In medicine and health, OA journals founded in the last 10 years are receiving about as many citations as subscription journals launched during the same period. Conclusions Our results indicate that OA journals indexed in Web of Science and/or Scopus are approaching the same scientific impact and quality as subscription journals, particularly in biomedicine and for journals funded by article processing charges. PMID:22805105

Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact.

PubMed

Björk, Bo-Christer; Solomon, David

2012-07-17

In the past few years there has been an ongoing debate as to whether the proliferation of open access (OA) publishing would damage the peer review system and put the quality of scientific journal publishing at risk. Our aim was to inform this debate by comparing the scientific impact of OA journals with subscription journals, controlling for journal age, the country of the publisher, discipline and (for OA publishers) their business model. The 2-year impact factors (the average number of citations to the articles in a journal) were used as a proxy for scientific impact. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) was used to identify OA journals as well as their business model. Journal age and discipline were obtained from the Ulrich's periodicals directory. Comparisons were performed on the journal level as well as on the article level where the results were weighted by the number of articles published in a journal. A total of 610 OA journals were compared with 7,609 subscription journals using Web of Science citation data while an overlapping set of 1,327 OA journals were compared with 11,124 subscription journals using Scopus data. Overall, average citation rates, both unweighted and weighted for the number of articles per journal, were about 30% higher for subscription journals. However, after controlling for discipline (medicine and health versus other), age of the journal (three time periods) and the location of the publisher (four largest publishing countries versus other countries) the differences largely disappeared in most subcategories except for journals that had been launched prior to 1996. OA journals that fund publishing with article processing charges (APCs) are on average cited more than other OA journals. In medicine and health, OA journals founded in the last 10 years are receiving about as many citations as subscription journals launched during the same period. Our results indicate that OA journals indexed in Web of Science and/or Scopus are approaching the same scientific impact and quality as subscription journals, particularly in biomedicine and for journals funded by article processing charges.

Orthopedics research output from China, USA, UK, Japan, Germany and France: A 10-year survey of the literature.

PubMed

Xin, Z; Jin, C; Zhengrong, G; Liehu, C; Weizong, W; Quan, L; Xiao, C; Jiacan, S

2016-11-01

In the past decade, researchers have made great progress in the field of Orthopedics. However, the research status of different countries is unclear. To summarize the number of published articles, we assessed the cumulative impact factors in top orthopedic journals. The aims of the study were to measure: 1) the quality and quantity of publications in orthopedics-related journals from China and other five counties, 2) the trend of the number of publications in orthopedics-related journals. The related journals were selected based on the 2014 scientific citation index (SCI) and articles were searched based on the PubMed database. To assess the quantity and quality of research output, the number of publications including clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, case reports, reviews, citations, impact factors, number of articles in the top 10 journals and most popular journals were recorded. A total of 143,138 orthopedics articles were published from 2005 to 2014. The USA accounts for 24.9% (35,763/143,138) of the publications, followed by UK (7878/143,138 (5.5%)), Japan (7133/143,138 (5.0%)), Germany (5942/143,138 (4.2%)), China (4143/143,138 (2.9%)) and France (2748/143,138 (1.9%)). The ranking for accumulated impact factors as follows: USA, UK, Japan, Germany, France and China. The mean impact factor's order is USA, China, Germany, Japan, France, UK, and interestingly the mean impact factors in Japan is similar to the Germany in 2005-2014. The USA had the highest percentage of articles in the top 10 journals, while China owns the least. The USA had the highest number of average citations, while Japan had lowest number of average citations. According to this study, we can conclude that the USA has had been leading the orthopedics research in the past 10 years. Although China still falls behind, it has made considerable progress in the orthopedics research, not only in quantity but also quality. IV. Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

The "Mendel syndrome" in science: durability of scientific literature and its effects on bibliometric analysis of individual scientists.

PubMed

Costas, Rodrigo; van Leeuwen, Thed N; van Raan, Anthony F J

2011-10-01

The obsolescence and "durability" of scientific literature have been important elements of debate during many years, especially regarding the proper calculation of bibliometric indicators. The effects of "delayed recognition" on impact indicators have importance and are of interest not only to bibliometricians but also among research managers and scientists themselves. It has been suggested that the "Mendel syndrome" is a potential drawback when assessing individual researchers through impact measures. If publications from particular researchers need more time than "normal" to be properly acknowledged by their colleagues, the impact of these researchers may be underestimated with common citation windows. In this paper, we answer the question whether the bibliometric indicators for scientists can be significantly affected by the Mendel syndrome. Applying a methodology developed previously for the classification of papers according to their durability (Costas et al., J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 61(8):1564-1581, 2010a; J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 61(2):329-339, 2010b), the scientific production of 1,064 researchers working at the Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC) in three different research areas has been analyzed. Cases of potential "Mendel syndrome" are rarely found among researchers and these cases do not significantly outperform the impact of researchers with a standard pattern of reception in their citations. The analysis of durability could be included as a parameter for the consideration of the citation windows used in the bibliometric analysis of individuals.

At the Leading Front of Neuroscience: A Bibliometric Study of the 100 Most-Cited Articles

PubMed Central

Yeung, Andy W. K.; Goto, Tazuko K.; Leung, W. Keung

2017-01-01

Background: It might be difficult for clinicians and scientists to identify comprehensively the major research topics given the large number of publications. A bibliometric report that identifies the most-cited articles within the body of the relevant literature may provide insight and guidance for readers toward scientific topics that are considered important for researchers and all relevant workers of academia. To our knowledge, there is a lack of an overall evaluation of the most-cited articles and hence of a comprehensive review of major research topics in neuroscience. The present study was therefore proposed to analyze and characterize the 100 most-cited articles in neuroscience. Methods: Based on data provided from Web of Science, the 100 most-cited articles relevant to neuroscience were identified and characterized. Information was extracted for each included article to assess for the publication year, journal published, impact factor, adjusted impact factor, citation count (total, normalized, and adjusted), reference list, authorship and article type. Results: The total citation count for the 100 most-cited articles ranged from 7,326 to 2,138 (mean 3087.0) and the normalized citation count ranged from 0.163 to 0.007 (mean 0.054). The majority of the 100 articles were research articles (67%) and published from 1996 to 2000 (30%). The author and journal with the largest share of these 100 articles were Stephen M. Smith (n = 6) and Science (n = 13) respectively. Among the 100 most-cited articles, 37 were interlinked via citations of one another, and they could be classified into five major topics, four of which were scientific topics, namely neurological disorders, prefrontal cortex/emotion/reward, brain network, and brain mapping. The remaining topic was methodology. Interestingly 41 out of 63 of the rest, non-interlinked articles could also be categorized under the above five topics. Adjusted journal impact factor among these 100 articles did not appear to be associated with the corresponding adjusted citation count. Conclusion: The current study compiles a comprehensive list and analysis of the 100 most-cited articles relevant to neuroscience that enables the comprehensive identification and recognition of the most important and relevant research topics concerned. PMID:28785211

At the Leading Front of Neuroscience: A Bibliometric Study of the 100 Most-Cited Articles.

PubMed

Yeung, Andy W K; Goto, Tazuko K; Leung, W Keung

2017-01-01

Background: It might be difficult for clinicians and scientists to identify comprehensively the major research topics given the large number of publications. A bibliometric report that identifies the most-cited articles within the body of the relevant literature may provide insight and guidance for readers toward scientific topics that are considered important for researchers and all relevant workers of academia. To our knowledge, there is a lack of an overall evaluation of the most-cited articles and hence of a comprehensive review of major research topics in neuroscience. The present study was therefore proposed to analyze and characterize the 100 most-cited articles in neuroscience. Methods: Based on data provided from Web of Science, the 100 most-cited articles relevant to neuroscience were identified and characterized. Information was extracted for each included article to assess for the publication year, journal published, impact factor, adjusted impact factor, citation count (total, normalized, and adjusted), reference list, authorship and article type. Results: The total citation count for the 100 most-cited articles ranged from 7,326 to 2,138 (mean 3087.0) and the normalized citation count ranged from 0.163 to 0.007 (mean 0.054). The majority of the 100 articles were research articles (67%) and published from 1996 to 2000 (30%). The author and journal with the largest share of these 100 articles were Stephen M. Smith ( n = 6) and Science ( n = 13) respectively. Among the 100 most-cited articles, 37 were interlinked via citations of one another, and they could be classified into five major topics, four of which were scientific topics, namely neurological disorders, prefrontal cortex/emotion/reward, brain network, and brain mapping. The remaining topic was methodology. Interestingly 41 out of 63 of the rest, non-interlinked articles could also be categorized under the above five topics. Adjusted journal impact factor among these 100 articles did not appear to be associated with the corresponding adjusted citation count. Conclusion: The current study compiles a comprehensive list and analysis of the 100 most-cited articles relevant to neuroscience that enables the comprehensive identification and recognition of the most important and relevant research topics concerned.

Biobankers: Treat the Poison of Invisibility with CoBRA, a Systematic Way of Citing Bioresources in Journal Articles

PubMed Central

Calzolari, Alessia; Cambon-Thomsen, Anne; Mabile, Laurence; Rossi, Anna Maria; De Castro, Paola; Bravo, Elena

2016-01-01

Even though an increasing portion of biomedical research today relies on the use of bioresources, at present biobankers are not able to trace this use in scientific literature and measure its impact with a variety of citation metrics. The “BRIF (Bioresource Research Impact Factor) and journal editors” subgroup was created precisely with the aim to study this issue and to build a standardized system to cite bioresources in journal articles. This report aims at presenting a guideline for Citation of BioResources in journal Articles (CoBRA). The guideline offers for the first time a standard for citing bioresources (including biobanks) within journal articles. It will increase their visibility and promote their sharing. PMID:27314833

Wikipedia as a gateway to biomedical research: The relative distribution and use of citations in the English Wikipedia.

PubMed

Maggio, Lauren A; Willinsky, John M; Steinberg, Ryan M; Mietchen, Daniel; Wass, Joseph L; Dong, Ting

2017-01-01

Wikipedia is a gateway to knowledge. However, the extent to which this gateway ends at Wikipedia or continues via supporting citations is unknown. Wikipedia's gateway functionality has implications for information design and education, notably in medicine. This study aims to establish benchmarks for the relative distribution and referral (click) rate of citations-as indicated by presence of a Digital Object Identifier (DOI)-from Wikipedia, with a focus on medical citations. DOIs referred from the English Wikipedia in August 2016 were obtained from Crossref.org. Next, based on a DOI's presence on a WikiProject Medicine page, all DOIs in Wikipedia were categorized as medical (WP:MED) or non-medical (non-WP:MED). Using this categorization, referred DOIs were classified as WP:MED, non-WP:MED, or BOTH, meaning the DOI may have been referred from either category. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Out of 5.2 million Wikipedia pages, 4.42% (n = 229,857) included at least one DOI. 68,870 were identified as WP:MED, with 22.14% (n = 15,250) featuring one or more DOIs. WP:MED pages featured on average 8.88 DOI citations per page, whereas non-WP:MED pages had on average 4.28 DOI citations. For DOIs only on WP:MED pages, a DOI was referred every 2,283 pageviews and for non-WP:MED pages every 2,467 pageviews. DOIs from BOTH pages accounted for 12% (n = 58,475). The referral of DOI citations found in BOTH could not be assigned to WP:MED or non-WP:MED, as the page from which the referral was made was not provided with the data. While these results cannot provide evidence of greater citation referral from WP:MED than non-WP:MED, they do provide benchmarks to assess strategies for changing referral patterns. These changes might include editors adopting new methods for designing and presenting citations or the introduction of teaching strategies that address the value of consulting citations as a tool for extending learning.

Analysis of Orthopaedic Research Produced During the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

PubMed

Balazs, George C; Dickens, Jonathan F; Brelin, Alaina M; Wolfe, Jared A; Rue, John-Paul H; Potter, Benjamin K

2015-09-01

Military orthopaedic surgeons have published a substantial amount of original research based on our care of combat-wounded service members and related studies during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, to our knowledge, the influence of this body of work has not been evaluated bibliometrically, and doing so is important to determine the modern impact of combat casualty research in the wider medical community. We sought to identify the 20 most commonly cited works from military surgeons published during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts and analyze them to answer the following questions: (1) What were the subject areas of these 20 articles and what was the 2013 Impact Factor of each journal that published them? (2) How many citations did they receive and what were the characteristics of the journals that cited them? (3) Do the citation analysis results obtained from Google Scholar mirror the results obtained from Thompson-Reuters' Web of Science? We searched the Web of Science Citation Index Expanded for relevant original research performed by US military orthopaedic surgeons related to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom between 2001 and 2014. Articles citing these studies were reviewed using both Web of Science and Google Scholar data. The 20 most cited articles meeting inclusion criteria were identified and analyzed by content domain, frequency of citation, and sources in which they were cited. Nine of these studies examined the epidemiology and outcome of combat injury. Six studies dealt with wound management, wound dehiscence, and formation of heterotopic ossification. Five studies examined infectious complications of combat trauma. The median number of citations garnered by these 20 articles was 41 (range, 28-264) in Web of Science. Other research citing these studies has appeared in 279 different journals, covering 26 different medical and surgical subspecialties, from authors in 31 different countries. Google Scholar contained 97% of the Web of Science citations, but also had 31 duplicate entries and 29 citations with defective links. Modern combat casualty research by military orthopaedic surgeons is widely cited by researchers in a diverse range of subspecialties and geographic locales. This suggests that the military continues to be a source of innovation that is broadly applicable to civilian medical and surgical practice and should encourage expansion of military-civilian collaboration to maximize the utility of the knowledge gained in the treatment of war trauma. Level IV, therapeutic study.

Documenting the Impact of Multisite Evaluations on the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Field

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Roseland, Denise; Greenseid, Lija O.; Volkov, Boris B.; Lawrenz, Frances

2011-01-01

This chapter discusses the impact that four multisite National Science Foundation (NSF) evaluations had on the broader field of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education and evaluation. Three approaches were used to investigate the broader impact of these evaluations on the field: (a) a citation analysis, (b) an on-line survey,…

Research on the value of medical library services: does it make an impact in the health care literature?

PubMed

Sherwill-Navarro, Pamela J; Wallace, Addajane L

2004-01-01

To evaluate the impact in the health care literature of research articles that provided evidence of the value of library services (including MEDLINE) as an element of quality health care. DATA SOURCES/SELECTION: Four research articles on the relationship between use of library services and quality health care were selected as "primary articles" from a MEDLINE search using appropriate Medical Subject Heading. Primary articles met the following criteria: written in English, reported research, related to clinical care, and published before 1995. The technique of citation analysis was used to measure the impact of the primary articles on the subsequent literature. The number, authorship, type, and publication venue of articles citing the primary articles were determined using ISI Web of Science, MEDLINE, other electronic resources, and the citing articles themselves. For the 146 English-language citing articles, the article type (i.e., advocacy, instructional, research) was noted; and, for those that reported research, the use to which the author put the cited material was determined. The primary articles were cited more often than the average articles published that year in the same journals. At the time of the study each article had been cited almost every year since publication. Of the 146 citing articles written in English, 43% were written by librarians, 38% by physicians, 12% by librarians with physicians. The majority were published in medical journals, followed in order of decreasing frequency by the Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, information science journals, and health administration journals. The results of this study demonstrate that published research on the value of medical library services has an impact on the literature. These articles are read and cited and continue to be of value.

Research on the value of medical library services: does it make an impact in the health care literature?*

PubMed Central

Sherwill-Navarro, Pamela J.; Wallace, Addajane L.

2004-01-01

Objective: To evaluate the impact in the health care literature of research articles that provided evidence of the value of library services (including MEDLINE) as an element of quality health care. Data Sources/Selection: Four research articles on the relationship between use of library services and quality health care were selected as “primary articles” from a MEDLINE search using appropriate Medical Subject Heading. Primary articles met the following criteria: written in English, reported research, related to clinical care, and published before 1995. Data Extraction: The technique of citation analysis was used to measure the impact of the primary articles on the subsequent literature. The number, authorship, type, and publication venue of articles citing the primary articles were determined using ISI Web of Science, MEDLINE, other electronic resources, and the citing articles themselves. For the 146 English-language citing articles, the article type (i.e., advocacy, instructional, research) was noted; and, for those that reported research, the use to which the author put the cited material was determined. Results: The primary articles were cited more often than the average articles published that year in the same journals. At the time of the study each article had been cited almost every year since publication. Of the 146 citing articles written in English, 43% were written by librarians, 38% by physicians, 12% by librarians with physicians. The majority were published in medical journals, followed in order of decreasing frequency by the Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, information science journals, and health administration journals. Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrate that published research on the value of medical library services has an impact on the literature. These articles are read and cited and continue to be of value. PMID:14762461

Association of journal quality indicators with methodological quality of clinical research articles.

PubMed

Lee, Kirby P; Schotland, Marieka; Bacchetti, Peter; Bero, Lisa A

2002-06-05

The ability to identify scientific journals that publish high-quality research would help clinicians, scientists, and health-policy analysts to select the most up-to-date medical literature to review. To assess whether journal characteristics of (1) peer-review status, (2) citation rate, (3) impact factor, (4) circulation, (5) manuscript acceptance rate, (6) MEDLINE indexing, and (7) Brandon/Hill Library List indexing are predictors of methodological quality of research articles, we conducted a cross-sectional study of 243 original research articles involving human subjects published in general internal medical journals. The mean (SD) quality score of the 243 articles was 1.37 (0.22). All journals reported a peer-review process and were indexed on MEDLINE. In models that controlled for article type (randomized controlled trial [RCT] or non-RCT), journal citation rate was the most statistically significant predictor (0.051 increase per doubling; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.037-0.065; P<.001). In separate analyses by article type, acceptance rate was the strongest predictor for RCT quality (-0.113 per doubling; 95% CI, -0.148 to -0.078; P<.001), while journal citation rate was the most predictive factor for non-RCT quality (0.051 per doubling; 95% CI, 0.044-0.059; P<.001). High citation rates, impact factors, and circulation rates, and low manuscript acceptance rates and indexing on Brandon/Hill Library List appear to be predictive of higher methodological quality scores for journal articles.

Promotion of the Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation to the international level based on journal metrics.

PubMed

Huh, Sun

2016-12-01

The aim of this study was to use journal metrics to confirm that the Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation has been promoted to the international level after changing its language to English-only in April 2013. Journal metrics, including the number of articles per year, countries of authors, countries of the editorial board members, impact factor, total citations, and the Hirsch index, were counted or calculated based on the journal homepage and the Web of Science Core Collection in December 2016. The number of citable articles was 52, 62, 59, and 74 in 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016, respectively. All authors were from Korea in 2013 and 2014, but the authors were from 11 countries in 2015 and from 16 countries in 2016. The editorial board members are currently from 11 countries. The impact factor without self-citations for 2015 was 0.912, corresponding to a Journal Citation Reports ranking of 32.9% out of 82 journals in the category of sport sciences. The total citations increased from 1 in 2013 to 130 in 2016. This journal was cited in 208 other source journals in the Web of Science. The citing authors were from 47 countries. The Hirsch index was 7, and review articles were the most frequently cited articles. The above results show a rapid development to the international level over 4 years. The introduction of digital technology to journals to improve their accessibility across multiple platforms is recommended.

Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science.

PubMed

Bakkalbasi, Nisa; Bauer, Kathleen; Glover, Janis; Wang, Lei

2006-06-29

Researchers turn to citation tracking to find the most influential articles for a particular topic and to see how often their own published papers are cited. For years researchers looking for this type of information had only one resource to consult: the Web of Science from Thomson Scientific. In 2004 two competitors emerged--Scopus from Elsevier and Google Scholar from Google. The research reported here uses citation analysis in an observational study examining these three databases; comparing citation counts for articles from two disciplines (oncology and condensed matter physics) and two years (1993 and 2003) to test the hypothesis that the different scholarly publication coverage provided by the three search tools will lead to different citation counts from each. Eleven journal titles with varying impact factors were selected from each discipline (oncology and condensed matter physics) using the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). All articles published in the selected titles were retrieved for the years 1993 and 2003, and a stratified random sample of articles was chosen, resulting in four sets of articles. During the week of November 7-12, 2005, the citation counts for each research article were extracted from the three sources. The actual citing references for a subset of the articles published in 2003 were also gathered from each of the three sources. For oncology 1993 Web of Science returned the highest average number of citations, 45.3. Scopus returned the highest average number of citations (8.9) for oncology 2003. Web of Science returned the highest number of citations for condensed matter physics 1993 and 2003 (22.5 and 3.9 respectively). The data showed a significant difference in the mean citation rates between all pairs of resources except between Google Scholar and Scopus for condensed matter physics 2003. For articles published in 2003 Google Scholar returned the largest amount of unique citing material for oncology and Web of Science returned the most for condensed matter physics. This study did not identify any one of these three resources as the answer to all citation tracking needs. Scopus showed strength in providing citing literature for current (2003) oncology articles, while Web of Science produced more citing material for 2003 and 1993 condensed matter physics, and 1993 oncology articles. All three tools returned some unique material. Our data indicate that the question of which tool provides the most complete set of citing literature may depend on the subject and publication year of a given article.

Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science

PubMed Central

Bakkalbasi, Nisa; Bauer, Kathleen; Glover, Janis; Wang, Lei

2006-01-01

Background Researchers turn to citation tracking to find the most influential articles for a particular topic and to see how often their own published papers are cited. For years researchers looking for this type of information had only one resource to consult: the Web of Science from Thomson Scientific. In 2004 two competitors emerged – Scopus from Elsevier and Google Scholar from Google. The research reported here uses citation analysis in an observational study examining these three databases; comparing citation counts for articles from two disciplines (oncology and condensed matter physics) and two years (1993 and 2003) to test the hypothesis that the different scholarly publication coverage provided by the three search tools will lead to different citation counts from each. Methods Eleven journal titles with varying impact factors were selected from each discipline (oncology and condensed matter physics) using the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). All articles published in the selected titles were retrieved for the years 1993 and 2003, and a stratified random sample of articles was chosen, resulting in four sets of articles. During the week of November 7–12, 2005, the citation counts for each research article were extracted from the three sources. The actual citing references for a subset of the articles published in 2003 were also gathered from each of the three sources. Results For oncology 1993 Web of Science returned the highest average number of citations, 45.3. Scopus returned the highest average number of citations (8.9) for oncology 2003. Web of Science returned the highest number of citations for condensed matter physics 1993 and 2003 (22.5 and 3.9 respectively). The data showed a significant difference in the mean citation rates between all pairs of resources except between Google Scholar and Scopus for condensed matter physics 2003. For articles published in 2003 Google Scholar returned the largest amount of unique citing material for oncology and Web of Science returned the most for condensed matter physics. Conclusion This study did not identify any one of these three resources as the answer to all citation tracking needs. Scopus showed strength in providing citing literature for current (2003) oncology articles, while Web of Science produced more citing material for 2003 and 1993 condensed matter physics, and 1993 oncology articles. All three tools returned some unique material. Our data indicate that the question of which tool provides the most complete set of citing literature may depend on the subject and publication year of a given article. PMID:16805916

A list of highly influential biomedical researchers, 1996-2011.

PubMed

Boyack, Kevin W; Klavans, Richard; Sorensen, Aaron A; Ioannidis, John P A

2013-12-01

We have generated a list of highly influential biomedical researchers based on Scopus citation data from the period 1996-2011. Of the 15,153,100 author identifiers in Scopus, approximately 1% (n=149,655) have an h-index >=20. Of those, we selected 532 authors who belonged to the 400 with highest total citation count (>=25,142 citations) and/or the 400 with highest h-index (>=76). Of those, we selected the top-400 living core biomedical researchers based on a normalized score combining total citations and h-index. Another 62 authors whose focus is outside biomedicine had a normalized score that was at least as high as the score of the 400th core biomedical researcher. We provide information on the profile of these most influential authors, including the most common Medical Subject Heading terms in their articles that are also specific to their work, most common journals where they publish, number of papers with over 100 citations that they have published as first/single, last, or middle authors, and impact score adjusted for authorship positions, given that crude citation indices and authorship positions are almost totally orthogonal. We also show for each researcher the distribution of their papers across 4 main levels (basic-to-applied) of research. We discuss technical issues, limitations and caveats, comparisons against other lists of highly-cited researchers, and potential uses of this resource. © 2013 Stichting European Society for Clinical Investigation Journal Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Impact of "JOBM": ISI Impact Factor Places the "Journal of Organizational Behavior Management" Third in Applied Psychology

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hantula, Donald A.

2006-01-01

The ISI Impact Factor for "JOBM" is 1.793, placing it third in the JCR rankings for journals in applied psychology with a sharply accelerating linear trend over the past 5 years. This article reviews the Impact Factor and raises questions regarding its reliability and validity and then considers a citation analysis of "JOBM" in light of the…

MESUR: USAGE-BASED METRICS OF SCHOLARLY IMPACT

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

BOLLEN, JOHAN; RODRIGUEZ, MARKO A.; VAN DE SOMPEL, HERBERT

2007-01-30

The evaluation of scholarly communication items is now largely a matter of expert opinion or metrics derived from citation data. Both approaches can fail to take into account the myriad of factors that shape scholarly impact. Usage data has emerged as a promising complement to existing methods o fassessment but the formal groundwork to reliably and validly apply usage-based metrics of schlolarly impact is lacking. The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation funded MESUR project constitutes a systematic effort to define, validate and cross-validate a range of usage-based metrics of schlolarly impact by creating a semantic model of the scholarly communication process.more » The constructed model will serve as the basis of a creating a large-scale semantic network that seamlessly relates citation, bibliographic and usage data from a variety of sources. A subsequent program that uses the established semantic network as a reference data set will determine the characteristics and semantics of a variety of usage-based metrics of schlolarly impact. This paper outlines the architecture and methodology adopted by the MESUR project and its future direction.« less

The Impact of Accounting Education Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Sangster, Alan; Fogarty, Tim; Stoner, Greg; Marriott, Neil

2015-01-01

This paper presents an exploratory study into the nature and patterns of usage of accounting education research. The study adopts the most accessible metric, "Google Advanced Scholar" citations, to analyse the impact of research published in the six principal English-language accounting education journals. The analysis reveals a global…

Thomas McKeown and Archibald Cochrane: a journey through the diffusion of their ideas.

PubMed Central

Alvarez-Dardet, C; Ruiz, M T

1993-01-01

In the 1970s Thomas McKeown and Archibald L Cochrane were two of the most influential voices in criticizing the dominance of medical thinking. A bibliometric study of the citations to McKeown's The Role of Medicine: Dream, Mirage or Nemesis and Cochrane's Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflections on Health Services was performed from the publication of each book until 1988 to study how their ideas have been disseminated. During the study period 430 papers in the Science Citation Index or the Social Sciences Citation Index cited Cochrane's book, 133 cited McKeown's, and 166 cited both. The citations came mainly from original papers published in journals of internal medicine or public health and epidemiology (35%) and written by authors from the United States or the United Kingdom. Cochrane's book was cited most frequently in medical journals, suggesting a higher degree of penetration of his ideas among medical scientists. Although the dominance of original papers among the citations suggests that these books have been important in stimulating new knowledge, the main problems that McKeown and Cochrane identified--namely, the relatively small impact of clinical medicine on health outcomes and the poor use of scientific methods in clinical practice--are still with us. PMID:8499857

Chinese Interpreting Studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiry

PubMed Central

Pekelis, Leonid

2015-01-01

Over the five decades since its beginnings, Chinese Interpreting Studies (CIS) has evolved into a dynamic field of academic enquiry with more than 3,500 scholars and 4,200 publications. Using quantitative and qualitative analysis, this scientometric study delves deep into CIS citation data to examine some of the noteworthy trends and patterns of behavior in the field: how can the field’s progress be quantified by means of citation analysis? Do its authors tend repeatedly to cite ‘classic’ papers or are they more drawn to their colleagues’ latest research? What different effects does the choice of empirical vs. theoretical research have on the use of citations in the various research brackets? The findings show that the field is steadily moving forward with new papers continuously being cited, although a number of influential papers stand out, having received a stream of citations in all the years examined. CIS scholars also have a tendency to cite much older English than Chinese publications across all document types, and empirical research has the greatest influence on the citation behavior of doctoral scholars, while theoretical studies have the largest impact on that of article authors. The goal of this study is to demonstrate the merits of blending quantitative and qualitative analyses to uncover hidden trends. PMID:26401459

Classic Citations in Main Primary Health Care Journals: A PRISMA-Compliant Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis.

PubMed

Li, Hongmei; Zhao, Xiyan; Zheng, Ping; Hu, Mei; Lu, Yan; Jia, Fukun; Tong, Xiaolin

2015-12-01

The impact of a publication in a particular medical area is reflected by the number of times the article is included as a citation. It is not known, however, which articles are cited the most in primary care journals. In our study, we aimed to identify the 100 most cited articles in primary care medicine and analyze their characteristics.We searched the Science Citation Index Expanded for articles published in 18 primary care journals using the subject category "Primary health care." We identified 100 articles in primary health care that were the most cited. We analyzed the characteristics of these articles using the title, number of citations, citation density, year of publication, journal source, decade published, country of origin, institution, author names, and type of article.The 100 articles that were cited the most were published between the years 1977 and 2009. The 1990s decade was the most productive decade. The number of citations ranged from 117 to 775. The articles were published in 9 journals and the journal with the largest number of most cited articles (n = 33) was the Journal of Family Practice. This was followed by the British Journal of General Practice (n = 17) and the journal Family Practice (n = 16). The United States was the most productive country (n = 59); the United Kingdom was next (n = 25) and this was followed by Canada (n = 5) and The Netherlands (n = 5). The most popular article type was a review article and this was followed by a qualitative study and then methodological study.Our study provides insight into the historical development of primary care studies, based on citations, and provides the foundation for further investigations.

Open access to journal articles in oncology: current situation and citation impact.

PubMed

Hua, F; Sun, H; Walsh, T; Glenny, A-M; Worthington, H

2017-10-01

Recent years have seen numerous efforts and resources devoted to the development of open access (OA), but the current OA situation of the oncology literature remains unknown. We conducted this cross-sectional study to determine the current share and provision methods of OA in the field of oncology, identify predictors of OA status (OA versus non-OA), and study the association between OA and citation counts. PubMed was searched for oncology-related, peer-reviewed journal articles published in December 2014. Google, Google Scholar, PubMed, ResearchGate, OpenDOAR and OAIster were manually checked to assess the OA status of each included article. Citation data were extracted from Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the OA proportion (primary outcome) and OA provision methods. Multivariable logistic regression and multilevel generalized linear model analyses were performed to study predictors of OA status and the association between OA and citation counts, respectively. In a random sample of 1000 articles, 912 were deemed eligible and therefore included. Of these, the full-texts of 530 articles (58.1%; 95% CI: 54.9-61.3) were freely available online: 314 (34.4%) were available from publishers ('Gold road' to OA), 424 (46.5%) were available via self-archiving ('Green road' to OA). According to multivariable regression analyses, impact factor, publisher type, language, research type, number of authors, continent of origin, and country income were significant predictors of articles' OA status; OA articles received a citation rate 1.24 times the incidence rate for non-OA articles (95% CI: 1.05-1.47; P = 0.012). Based on our sample, in the field of oncology, 42% of recent journal articles are behind the pay-wall (non-OA) 1 year after publication; the 'Green road' of providing OA is more common than the 'Gold road'; OA is associated with higher citation counts. © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

The top cited articles on glioma stem cells in Web of Science.

PubMed

Yi, Fuxin; Ma, Jun; Ni, Weimin; Chang, Rui; Liu, Wenda; Han, Xiubin; Pan, Dongxiao; Liu, Xingbo; Qiu, Jianwu

2013-05-25

Glioma is the most common intracranial tumor and has a poor patient prognosis. The presence of brain tumor stem cells was gradually being understood and recognized, which might be beneficial for the treatment of glioma. To use bibliometric indexes to track study focuses on glioma stem cell, and to investigate the relationships among geographic origin, impact factors, and highly cited articles indexed in Web of Science. A list of citation classics for glioma stem cells was generated by searching the database of Web of Science-Expanded using the terms "glioma stem cell" or "glioma, stem cell" or "brain tumor stem cell". The top 63 cited research articles which were cited more than 100 times were retrieved by reading the abstract or full text if needed. Each eligible article was reviewed for basic information on subject categories, country of origin, journals, authors, and source of journals. Inclusive criteria: (1) articles in the field of glioma stem cells which was cited more than 100 times; (2) fundamental research on humans or animals, clinical trials and case reports; (3) research article; (4) year of publication: 1899-2012; and (5) citation database: Science Citation Index-Expanded. Exclusive criteria: (1) articles needing to be manually searched or accessed only by telephone; (2) unpublished articles; and (3) reviews, conference proceedings, as well as corrected papers. Of 2 040 articles published, the 63 top-cited articles were published between 1992 and 2010. The number of citations ranged from 100 to 1 754, with a mean of 280 citations per article. These citation classics came from nineteen countries, of which 46 articles came from the United States. Duke University and University of California, San Francisco led the list of classics with seven papers each. The 63 top-cited articles were published in 28 journals, predominantly Cancer Research and Cancer Cell, followed by Cell Stem Cell and Nature. Our bibliometric analysis provides a historical perspective on the progress of glioma stem cell research. Articles originating from outstanding institutions of the United States and published in high-impact journals are most likely to be cited.

[Global funding for papers of excellence on smoking, 2010-2014].

PubMed

Granda-Orive, José Ignacio de; Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo; García-Río, Francisco; López-Padilla, Daniel E; Solano-Reina, Segismundo; Jiménez-Ruiz, Carlos A; Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael

2015-11-01

The objective of this study was to investigate the funding received by papers of excellence on smoking at the global level between 2010 and 2014 through the Web of Science, and to find out if funding is associated with greater impact. We searched the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) through the Web of Science platform on 20 May 2015 (typology consisting of originals and reviews for the period from 2010 to 2014). The search strategy was "smok*" OR "tobac*." To select the papers of excellence, we picked those that had an h index (i.e., number of articles having at least that many citations) from among the papers in the overall sample generated by the strategy. Of the 193 papers of excellence on smoking that were identified, 158 had received funding from 279 different financing institutions that intervened 522 times. The funding came primarily from government agencies, private foundations, and the pharmaceutical industry. Public funding declined and private funding increased over the years included in the analysis. Receipt of funding was not associated with greater impact at a later date. Most of the papers of excellence on smoking received external funding primarily from government agencies, private foundations, and the pharmaceutical industry. Public funding has decreased, while private funding has increased. Receipt of funding was not associated with greater impact at a later date.

Estimating research productivity and quality in assistive technology: a bibliometric analysis spanning four decades.

PubMed

Ryan, Cindy; Tewey, Betsy; Newman, Shelia; Turner, Tracy; Jaeger, Robert J

2004-12-01

Conduct a quantitative assessment of the number of papers contained in MEDLINE related to selected types of assistive technology (AT), and to identify journals publishing significant numbers of papers related to AT, and evaluate them with quantitative productivity and quality measures. Consecutive sample of all papers in MEDLINE identified by standard medical subject headings for selected types of AT from 1963-2003. Number of journals carrying AT papers, papers per journal (both total number and those specific to AT), journal impact factor, circulation, and number of AT citations per year over time for each area of AT. We present search terms, estimates of the numbers of AT citations in MEDLINE, the journals most likely to contain articles related to AT, journal impact factors, and journal circulations (when available). We also present the number of citations in various areas of AT over time from 1963-2003. Suggestions are presented for possible future modifications of the MEDLINE controlled vocabulary, based on terminology used in existing AT classifications schemes, such as ISO 9999. Research papers in the areas of AT examined showed publication across a wide variety of journals. There are a number of journals publishing articles in AT that have impact factors above the median. Some areas of AT have shown an increase in publications per year over time, while others have shown a more constant level of productivity.

Characterizing social media metrics of scholarly papers: the effect of document properties and collaboration patterns.

PubMed

Haustein, Stefanie; Costas, Rodrigo; Larivière, Vincent

2015-01-01

A number of new metrics based on social media platforms--grouped under the term "altmetrics"--have recently been introduced as potential indicators of research impact. Despite their current popularity, there is a lack of information regarding the determinants of these metrics. Using publication and citation data from 1.3 million papers published in 2012 and covered in Thomson Reuters' Web of Science as well as social media counts from Altmetric.com, this paper analyses the main patterns of five social media metrics as a function of document characteristics (i.e., discipline, document type, title length, number of pages and references) and collaborative practices and compares them to patterns known for citations. Results show that the presence of papers on social media is low, with 21.5% of papers receiving at least one tweet, 4.7% being shared on Facebook, 1.9% mentioned on blogs, 0.8% found on Google+ and 0.7% discussed in mainstream media. By contrast, 66.8% of papers have received at least one citation. Our findings show that both citations and social media metrics increase with the extent of collaboration and the length of the references list. On the other hand, while editorials and news items are seldom cited, it is these types of document that are the most popular on Twitter. Similarly, while longer papers typically attract more citations, an opposite trend is seen on social media platforms. Finally, contrary to what is observed for citations, it is papers in the Social Sciences and humanities that are the most often found on social media platforms. On the whole, these findings suggest that factors driving social media and citations are different. Therefore, social media metrics cannot actually be seen as alternatives to citations; at most, they may function as complements to other type of indicators.

Cardiovascular research publications from Latin America between 1999 and 2008. A bibliometric study.

PubMed

Colantonio, Lisandro D; Baldridge, Abigail S; Huffman, Mark D; Bloomfield, Gerald S; Prabhakaran, Dorairaj

2015-01-01

Cardiovascular research publications seem to be increasing in Latin America overall. To analyze trends in cardiovascular publications and their citations from countries in Latin America between 1999 and 2008, and to compare them with those from the rest of the countries. We retrieved references of cardiovascular publications between 1999 and 2008 and their five-year post-publication citations from the Web of Knowledge database. For countries in Latin America, we calculated the total number of publications and their citation indices (total citations divided by number of publications) by year. We analyzed trends on publications and citation indices over time using Poisson regression models. The analysis was repeated for Latin America as a region, and compared with that for the rest of the countries grouped according to economic development. Brazil (n = 6,132) had the highest number of publications in 1999-2008, followed by Argentina (n = 1,686), Mexico (n = 1,368) and Chile (n = 874). Most countries showed an increase in publications over time, leaded by Guatemala (36.5% annually [95%CI: 16.7%-59.7%]), Colombia (22.1% [16.3%-28.2%]), Costa Rica (18.1% [8.1%-28.9%]) and Brazil (17.9% [16.9%-19.1%]). However, trends on citation indices varied widely (from -33.8% to 28.4%). From 1999 to 2008, cardiovascular publications of Latin America increased by 12.9% (12.1%-13.5%) annually. However, the citation indices of Latin America increased 1.5% (1.3%-1.7%) annually, a lower increase than those of all other country groups analyzed. Although the number of cardiovascular publications of Latin America increased from 1999 to 2008, trends on citation indices suggest they may have had a relatively low impact on the research field, stressing the importance of considering quality and dissemination on local research policies.

Cardiovascular Research Publications from Latin America between 1999 and 2008. A Bibliometric Study

PubMed Central

Colantonio, Lisandro D.; Baldridge, Abigail S.; Huffman, Mark D.; Bloomfield, Gerald S.; Prabhakaran, Dorairaj

2015-01-01

Background Cardiovascular research publications seem to be increasing in Latin America overall. Objective To analyze trends in cardiovascular publications and their citations from countries in Latin America between 1999 and 2008, and to compare them with those from the rest of the countries. Methods We retrieved references of cardiovascular publications between 1999 and 2008 and their five-year post-publication citations from the Web of Knowledge database. For countries in Latin America, we calculated the total number of publications and their citation indices (total citations divided by number of publications) by year. We analyzed trends on publications and citation indices over time using Poisson regression models. The analysis was repeated for Latin America as a region, and compared with that for the rest of the countries grouped according to economic development. Results Brazil (n = 6,132) had the highest number of publications in1999-2008, followed by Argentina (n = 1,686), Mexico (n = 1,368) and Chile (n = 874). Most countries showed an increase in publications over time, leaded by Guatemala (36.5% annually [95%CI: 16.7%-59.7%]), Colombia (22.1% [16.3%-28.2%]), Costa Rica (18.1% [8.1%-28.9%]) and Brazil (17.9% [16.9%-19.1%]). However, trends on citation indices varied widely (from -33.8% to 28.4%). From 1999 to 2008, cardiovascular publications of Latin America increased by 12.9% (12.1%-13.5%) annually. However, the citation indices of Latin America increased 1.5% (1.3%-1.7%) annually, a lower increase than those of all other country groups analyzed. Conclusions Although the number of cardiovascular publications of Latin America increased from 1999 to 2008, trends on citation indices suggest they may have had a relatively low impact on the research field, stressing the importance of considering quality and dissemination on local research policies. PMID:25714407

Characterizing Social Media Metrics of Scholarly Papers: The Effect of Document Properties and Collaboration Patterns

PubMed Central

Haustein, Stefanie; Costas, Rodrigo; Larivière, Vincent

2015-01-01

A number of new metrics based on social media platforms—grouped under the term “altmetrics”—have recently been introduced as potential indicators of research impact. Despite their current popularity, there is a lack of information regarding the determinants of these metrics. Using publication and citation data from 1.3 million papers published in 2012 and covered in Thomson Reuters’ Web of Science as well as social media counts from Altmetric.com, this paper analyses the main patterns of five social media metrics as a function of document characteristics (i.e., discipline, document type, title length, number of pages and references) and collaborative practices and compares them to patterns known for citations. Results show that the presence of papers on social media is low, with 21.5% of papers receiving at least one tweet, 4.7% being shared on Facebook, 1.9% mentioned on blogs, 0.8% found on Google+ and 0.7% discussed in mainstream media. By contrast, 66.8% of papers have received at least one citation. Our findings show that both citations and social media metrics increase with the extent of collaboration and the length of the references list. On the other hand, while editorials and news items are seldom cited, it is these types of document that are the most popular on Twitter. Similarly, while longer papers typically attract more citations, an opposite trend is seen on social media platforms. Finally, contrary to what is observed for citations, it is papers in the Social Sciences and humanities that are the most often found on social media platforms. On the whole, these findings suggest that factors driving social media and citations are different. Therefore, social media metrics cannot actually be seen as alternatives to citations; at most, they may function as complements to other type of indicators. PMID:25780916

The 100 most cited manuscripts in emergency abdominal surgery: A bibliometric analysis.

PubMed

Ellul, Thomas; Bullock, Nicholas; Abdelrahman, Tarig; Powell, Arfon G M T; Witherspoon, Jolene; Lewis, Wyn G

2017-01-01

The number of citations a scientific article receives provides a good indication of its impact within any given field. This bibliometric analysis aimed to identify the 100 most cited articles in Emergency Abdominal Surgery (EAS), to highlight key areas of interest and identify those that have most significantly shaped contemporary clinical practice in this newly evolving surgical specialty. This is of increasing relevance as concerns grow regarding the variable and suboptimal outcomes in Emergency General Surgery. The Thomson Reuters Web of Science database was used to search using the terms [Emergency AND Abdom* AND Surg*] to identify all English language, full manuscripts. Results were ranked according to citation number. The top 100 articles were further analysed by subject, author, journal, year of publication, institution, and country of origin. The median (range) citation number of the top 100 out of 7433 eligible papers was 131 (1569-97). The most cited paper (by Goldman et al., Massachusetts General Hospital, New England Journal of Medicine; 1569 citations) focused on cardiac risk stratification in non-cardiac surgery. The Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection and Critical Care published the most papers and received most citations (n = 19; 2954 citations. The majority of papers were published by centres in the USA (n = 52; 9422 citations), followed by the UK (n = 13; 1816 citations). The most common topics of publication concerned abdominal aneurysm management (n = 26) and emergency gastrointestinal surgery (n = 26). Vascular surgery, risk assessment and gastrointestinal surgery were the areas of focus for 59% of the contemporary most cited emergency abdominal surgery manuscripts. By providing the most influential references this work serves as a guide to what makes a citable emergency surgery paper. Crown Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Do citations and readership identify seminal publications?

DOE PAGES

Herrmannova, Drahomira; Patton, Robert M.; Knoth, Petr; ...

2018-02-10

Here, this work presents a new approach for analysing the ability of existing research metrics to identify research which has strongly influenced future developments. More specifically, we focus on the ability of citation counts and Mendeley reader counts to distinguish between publications regarded as seminal and publications regarded as literature reviews by field experts. The main motivation behind our research is to gain a better understanding of whether and how well the existing research metrics relate to research quality. For this experiment we have created a new dataset which we call TrueImpactDataset and which contains two types of publications, seminalmore » papers and literature reviews. Using the dataset, we conduct a set of experiments to study how citation and reader counts perform in distinguishing these publication types, following the intuition that causing a change in a field signifies research quality. Finally, our research shows that citation counts work better than a random baseline (by a margin of 10%) in distinguishing important seminal research papers from literature reviews while Mendeley reader counts do not work better than the baseline.« less

Cited Brazilian papers in general surgery between 1970 and 2009

PubMed Central

Heldwein, Flavio L.; Hartmann, Antonio A.; Kalil, Antonio N.; Neves, Bruno V. D.; Ratti, Giorigo S. B.; Beber, Moises C.; Souza, Rafael M.; d’Acampora, Armando J.

2010-01-01

OBJECTIVES To identify the most cited articles in general surgery published by Brazilian authors. INTRODUCTION There are several ways for the international community to recognize the quality of a scientific article. Although controversial, the most widely used and reliable methodology to identify the importance of an article is citation analysis. METHODS A search using the Institute for Scientific Information citation database (Science Citation Index Expanded) was performed to identify highly cited Brazilian papers published in twenty-six highly cited general surgery journals, selected based on their elevated impact factors, from 1970 to 2009. Further analysis was done on the 65 most-cited papers. RESULTS We identified 1,713 Brazilian articles, from which nine papers emerged as classics (more than 100 citations received). For the Brazilian contributions, a total increase of about 21-fold was evident between 1970 and 2009. Although several topics were covered, articles covering trauma, oncology and organ transplantation were the most cited. The majority of classic studies were done with international cooperation. CONCLUSIONS This study identified the most influential Brazilian articles published in internationally renowned general surgery journals. PMID:20535371

Biomedical research platforms and their influence on article submissions and journal rankings: An update.

PubMed Central

Lippi, Giuseppe; Favaloro, Emmanuel J; Simundic, Ana-Maria

2012-01-01

After being indexed in 2006 in EMBASE/Excerpta Medica and Scopus, and later in Science Citation Index Expanded and Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition citation databases, Biochemia Medica launched a new web page and online manuscript submission system in 2010, and celebrated its first Impact Factor in the same year. Now, starting from the end of the 2011, the journal will also be indexed in PubMed/Medline, and this will contribute to increase the journal’s exposure and accessibility worldwide. This is an important breakthrough, which is expected to further increase the popularity of the journal, as well as the submission rate and citations. Although several tools are currently available as Web resources to retrieve scientific articles, whose functioning and basic criteria are thought to be rather similar, the functionality, coverage, notoriety and prominence may differ widely. The recent indexing of Biochemia Medica in PubMed/Medline has thereby given us the opportunity to provide a timely update on biomedical research platforms, their relationship with article submissions and journal rankings. PMID:22384515

Do citations and readership identify seminal publications?

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Herrmannova, Drahomira; Patton, Robert M.; Knoth, Petr

Here, this work presents a new approach for analysing the ability of existing research metrics to identify research which has strongly influenced future developments. More specifically, we focus on the ability of citation counts and Mendeley reader counts to distinguish between publications regarded as seminal and publications regarded as literature reviews by field experts. The main motivation behind our research is to gain a better understanding of whether and how well the existing research metrics relate to research quality. For this experiment we have created a new dataset which we call TrueImpactDataset and which contains two types of publications, seminalmore » papers and literature reviews. Using the dataset, we conduct a set of experiments to study how citation and reader counts perform in distinguishing these publication types, following the intuition that causing a change in a field signifies research quality. Finally, our research shows that citation counts work better than a random baseline (by a margin of 10%) in distinguishing important seminal research papers from literature reviews while Mendeley reader counts do not work better than the baseline.« less

Cited Brazilian papers in general surgery between 1970 and 2009.

PubMed

Heldwein, Flavio L; Hartmann, Antonio A; Kalil, Antonio N; Neves, Bruno V D; Ratti, Giorigo S B; Beber, Moises C; Souza, Rafael M; d'Acampora, Armando J

2010-05-01

To identify the most cited articles in general surgery published by Brazilian authors. There are several ways for the international community to recognize the quality of a scientific article. Although controversial, the most widely used and reliable methodology to identify the importance of an article is citation analysis. A search using the Institute for Scientific Information citation database (Science Citation Index Expanded) was performed to identify highly cited Brazilian papers published in twenty-six highly cited general surgery journals, selected based on their elevated impact factors, from 1970 to 2009. Further analysis was done on the 65 most-cited papers. We identified 1,713 Brazilian articles, from which nine papers emerged as classics (more than 100 citations received). For the Brazilian contributions, a total increase of about 21-fold was evident between 1970 and 2009. Although several topics were covered, articles covering trauma, oncology and organ transplantation were the most cited. The majority of classic studies were done with international cooperation. This study identified the most influential Brazilian articles published in internationally renowned general surgery journals.

Advanced Large Scale Cross Domain Temporal Topic Modeling Algorithms to Infer the Influence of Recent Research on IPCC Assessment Reports

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Sleeman, J.; Halem, M.; Finin, T.; Cane, M. A.

2016-12-01

Approximately every five years dating back to 1989, thousands of climate scientists, research centers and government labs volunteer to prepare comprehensive Assessment Reports for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. These are highly curated reports distributed to 200 nation policy makers. There have been five IPCC Assessment Reports to date, the latest leading to a Paris Agreement in Dec. 2016 signed thus far by 172 nations to limit the amount of global Greenhouse gases emitted to producing no more than a 20 C warming of the atmosphere. These reports are a living evolving big data collection tracing 30 years of climate science research, observations, and model scenario intercomparisons. They contain more than 200,000 citations over a 30 year period that trace the evolution of the physical basis of climate science, the observed and predicted impact, risk and adaptation to increased greenhouse gases and mitigation approaches, pathways, policies for climate change. Document-topic and topic-term probability distributions are built from the vocabularies of the respective assessment report chapters and citations. Using Microsoft Bing, we retrieve 150,000 citations referenced across chapters and convert those citations to text. Using a word n-gram model based on a heterogeneous set of climate change terminology, lemmatization, noise filtering and stopword elimination, we calculate word frequencies for chapters and citations. Temporal document sets are built based on the assessment period. In addition to topic modeling, we employ cross domain correlation measures. Using the Jensen-Shannon divergence and Pearson correlation we build correlation matrices for chapter and citations topics. The shared vocabulary acts as the bridge between domains resulting in chapter-citation point pairs in space. Pairs are established based on a document-topic probability distribution. Each chapter and citation is associated with a vector of topics and based on the n most probable topics, we establish which chapter-citation pairs are most similar. We will perform posterior inferences based on Hastings -Metropolis simulated annealing MCMC algorithm to infer, from the evolution of topics starting from AR1 to AR4, assertions of topics for AR5 and potentially AR6.

Evaluating Academic Journals without Impact Factors for Collection Management Decisions.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Dilevko, Juris; Atkinson, Esther

2002-01-01

Discussion of evaluating academic journals for collection management decisions focuses on a methodological framework for evaluating journals not ranked by impact factors in Journal Citation Reports. Compares nonranked journals with ranked journals and then applies this framework to a case study in the field of medical science. (LRW)

The value and impact of information provided through library services for patient care: developing guidance for best practice.

PubMed

Weightman, Alison; Urquhart, Christine; Spink, Siân; Thomas, Rhian

2009-03-01

Previous impact tool-kits for UK health libraries required updating to reflect recent evidence and changes in library services. The National Knowledge Service funded development of updated guidance. Survey tools were developed based on previous impact studies and a systematic review. The resulting draft questionnaire survey was tested at four sites, and the interview schedule was investigated in a fifth area. A literature search in ASSIA, Google Scholar, INTUTE, LISA, LISTA, SCIRUS, Social Sciences Citation Index (Web of Knowledge), and the major UK University and National Libraries Catalogue (COPAC), identified ways to improve response rates. Other expert advice contributed to the guidance. The resulting guidance contains evidence-based advice and a planning pathway for conducting an impact survey as a service audit. The survey tools (critical incident questionnaire and interview schedule) are available online. The evidence-based advice recommends personalizing the request, assuring confidentiality, and using follow-up reminders. Questionnaires should be brief, and small incentives, such as a lottery draw should be considered. Bias is minimized if the survey is conducted and analysed by independent researchers. The guidance is a starting point for a pragmatic survey to assess the impact of health library services.

The nearly universal link between the age of past knowledge and tomorrow’s breakthroughs in science and technology: The hotspot

PubMed Central

Mukherjee, Satyam; Romero, Daniel M.; Jones, Ben; Uzzi, Brian

2017-01-01

Scientists and inventors can draw on an ever-expanding literature for the building blocks of tomorrow’s ideas, yet little is known about how combinations of past work are related to future discoveries. Our analysis parameterizes the age distribution of a work’s references and revealed three links between the age of prior knowledge and hit papers and patents. First, works that cite literature with a low mean age and high age variance are in a citation “hotspot”; these works double their likelihood of being in the top 5% or better of citations. Second, the hotspot is nearly universal in all branches of science and technology and is increasingly predictive of a work’s future citation impact. Third, a scientist or inventor is significantly more likely to write a paper in the hotspot when they are coauthoring than whey they are working alone. Our findings are based on all 28,426,345 scientific papers in the Web of Science, 1945–2013, and all 5,382,833 U.S. patents, 1950–2010, and reveal new antecedents of high-impact science and the link between prior literature and tomorrow’s breakthrough ideas. PMID:28439537

The nearly universal link between the age of past knowledge and tomorrow's breakthroughs in science and technology: The hotspot.

PubMed

Mukherjee, Satyam; Romero, Daniel M; Jones, Ben; Uzzi, Brian

2017-04-01

Scientists and inventors can draw on an ever-expanding literature for the building blocks of tomorrow's ideas, yet little is known about how combinations of past work are related to future discoveries. Our analysis parameterizes the age distribution of a work's references and revealed three links between the age of prior knowledge and hit papers and patents. First, works that cite literature with a low mean age and high age variance are in a citation "hotspot"; these works double their likelihood of being in the top 5% or better of citations. Second, the hotspot is nearly universal in all branches of science and technology and is increasingly predictive of a work's future citation impact. Third, a scientist or inventor is significantly more likely to write a paper in the hotspot when they are coauthoring than whey they are working alone. Our findings are based on all 28,426,345 scientific papers in the Web of Science, 1945-2013, and all 5,382,833 U.S. patents, 1950-2010, and reveal new antecedents of high-impact science and the link between prior literature and tomorrow's breakthrough ideas.

Comparison Between Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Metrics, and SCimago Journal Rank Indicator of Pediatric Neurology Journals.

PubMed

Kianifar, Hamidreza; Sadeghi, Ramin; Zarifmahmoudi, Leili

2014-04-01

Impact Factor (IF) as a major journal quality indicator has a series of shortcomings including effect of self-citation, review articles, total number of articles, etc. In this study, we compared 4 journals quality indices ((IF), Eigenfactor Score (ES), Article Influence Score (AIS) and SCImago Journal Rank indicator (SJR)) in the specific Pediatric Neurology journals. All ISI and Scopus indexed specific Pediatric Neurology journals were compared regarding their 2011 IF, ES, AIS and SJR. Fourteen pediatric Neurology journals were identified, 3 of which were only Scopus indexed and the others were both ISI and Scopus indexed. High correlation was found between IF and AIS (0.850). Correlations between IF and other indices were not that high. Self-citation, total article number and review articles were related to the IF and other indices as well as their ranks. English language and citation to non citable item didn't have any effect on pediatric neurology journals ranks. Although all the above mentioned indicators can be used interchangeably, using all considered indices is a more appropriate way than using only IF for quality assessment of pediatric neurology journals.

Comparison Between Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Metrics, and SCimago Journal Rank Indicator of Pediatric Neurology Journals

PubMed Central

Kianifar, Hamidreza; Sadeghi, Ramin; Zarifmahmoudi, Leili

2014-01-01

Background: Impact Factor (IF) as a major journal quality indicator has a series of shortcomings including effect of self-citation, review articles, total number of articles, etc. In this study, we compared 4 journals quality indices ((IF), Eigenfactor Score (ES), Article Influence Score (AIS) and SCImago Journal Rank indicator (SJR)) in the specific Pediatric Neurology journals. Methods: All ISI and Scopus indexed specific Pediatric Neurology journals were compared regarding their 2011 IF, ES, AIS and SJR. Results: Fourteen pediatric Neurology journals were identified, 3 of which were only Scopus indexed and the others were both ISI and Scopus indexed. High correlation was found between IF and AIS (0.850). Correlations between IF and other indices were not that high. Self-citation, total article number and review articles were related to the IF and other indices as well as their ranks. English language and citation to non citable item didn’t have any effect on pediatric neurology journals ranks. Conclusion: Although all the above mentioned indicators can be used interchangeably, using all considered indices is a more appropriate way than using only IF for quality assessment of pediatric neurology journals. PMID:24825934

Do younger Sleeping Beauties prefer a technological prince?

PubMed

van Raan, Anthony F J; Winnink, Jos J

2018-01-01

In this paper we investigate recent Sleeping Beauties cited in patents (SB-SNPRs). We find that the increasing trend of the relative number of SBs stopped around 1998. Moreover, we find that the time lag between the publication year of the SB-SNPRs and their first citation in a patent is becoming shorter in recent years. Our observations also suggest that, on average, in the more recent years SBs are awakened increasingly earlier by a 'technological prince' rather than by a 'scientific prince'. These observations suggest that SBs with technological importance are 'discovered' earlier in an application-oriented context. Then, because of this earlier recognized technological relevance, papers may be cited also earlier in a scientific context. Thus early recognized technological relevance may 'prevent' papers to become an SB. The scientific impact of Sleeping Beauties is generally not necessarily related to the technological importance of the SBs, as far as measured with number and impact of the citing patents. The analysis of the occurrence of inventor-author relations as well as the citation years of inventor-author patents suggest that the scientific awakening of Sleeping Beauties only rarely occurs by inventor-author self-citation.

[Case and studies].

PubMed

Schubert, András

2015-11-15

Case studies and case reports form an important and ever growing part of scientific and scholarly literature. The paper deals with the share and citation rate of these publication types on different fields of research. In general, evidence seems to support the opinion that an excessive number of such publications may negatively influence the impact factor of the journal. In the literature of scientometrics, case studies (at least the presence of the term "case study" in the titles of the papers) have a moderate share, but their citation rate is practically equal to that of other publication types.

Pharmaceutical research in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: A scientometric analysis during 2001–2010

PubMed Central

Alhaider, Ibrahim; Mueen Ahmed, K.K.; Gupta, B.M.

2013-01-01

Studies on the performance of Saudi Arabia in the pharmaceutical science research using quantitative and qualitative measures. They analyze the productivity and global publication share and rank of the top 15 countries. The author studies Saudi Arabia’s publications output, growth and citation quality, international collaborative publication share and most important the collaborating partners, contribution and citation impact of its top 15 organizations and authors, productivity patterns of its top publishing journals and characteristics of its highly cited papers. PMID:26106268

Bias and other limitations affect measures of journals in integrative and complementary medicine

PubMed Central

Fan, Ka-wai

2015-01-01

Publishing articles in a prestigious journal is a golden rule for university professors and researchers nowadays. Impact factor, journal rank, and citation count, included in Science Citation Index managed by Thomson Reuters Web of Science, are the most important indicators for evaluating the quality of academic journals. By listing the journals encompassed in the “Integrative and Complementary Medicine” category of Science Citation Index from 2003 to 2013, this paper examines the publication trends of journals in the category. The examination includes number, country of origin, ranking, and languages of journals. Moreover, newly listed or removed journals in the category, journal publishers, and open access strategies are examined. It is concluded that the role of journal publisher should not be undermined in the “Integrative and Complementary Medicine” category. PMID:26213508

Bias and other limitations affect measures of journals in integrative and complementary medicineKa-wai Fan, PhD.

PubMed

Fan, Ka-wai

2015-07-01

Publishing articles in a prestigious journal is a golden rule for university professors and researchers nowadays. Impact factor, journal rank, and citation count, included in Science Citation Index managed by Thomson Reuters Web of Science, are the most important indicators for evaluating the quality of academic journals. By listing the journals encompassed in the "Integrative and Complementary Medicine" category of Science Citation Index from 2003 to 2013, this paper examines the publication trends of journals in the category. The examination includes number, country of origin, ranking, and languages of journals. Moreover, newly listed or removed journals in the category, journal publishers, and open access strategies are examined. It is concluded that the role of journal publisher should not be undermined in the "Integrative and Complementary Medicine" category.

Disparities in Cardiovascular Research Output and Citations From 52 African Countries: A Time‐Trend, Bibliometric Analysis (1999–2008)

PubMed Central

Bloomfield, Gerald S.; Baldridge, Abigail; Agarwal, Anubha; Huffman, Mark D.; Colantonio, Lisandro D.; Bahiru, Ehete; Ajay, Vamadevan S.; Prabhakaran, Poornima; Lewison, Grant; Prabhakaran, Dorairaj

2015-01-01

Background Cardiovascular research output and citations of publications from Africa have historically been low yet may be increasing. However, data from the continent are limited. Methods and Results To evaluate the cardiovascular research output and citations from 52 African countries between 1999 and 2008, we created a bibliometric filter to capture cardiovascular research articles published in the Web of Knowledge based on specialist journals and title words. Two coauthors with expertise in cardiovascular medicine tested and refined this filter to achieve >90% precision and recall. We matched retrieved records with their associated citation reports and calculated the running 5‐year citation count postpublication, including the year of publication. Publications from Africa were identified by author addresses. South Africa published 872 cardiovascular research papers, Egypt 393, Tunisia 264, and Nigeria 192 between 1999 and 2008. The number of publications increased over the time period for a small number of countries (range 0.1 to 4.8 more publications per year by fractional count). Most countries' citations were low (<50), but citations were greatest for South Africa (7063), Egypt (2557), Tunisia (903), and Nigeria (540). The same countries had the greatest annual increase in 5‐year citation index values: 65 (95% CI: 30, 99) for South Africa, 46 (34, 58) for Egypt, 22 (15, 28) for Tunisia, and 8 (2, 14) for Nigeria. The burden of cardiovascular disease had a weak and inconsistent relationship to cardiovascular publications (r2=0.07, P=0.05). Greater gross domestic product was associated with more cardiovascular publications in 2008 (r2=0.53, P<0.0001). Conclusions The increases in cardiovascular research outputs from Africa are concentrated in a few countries. The reasons for regional differences in research outputs require further investigation, particularly relative to competing disease burdens. Higher prioritization of cardiovascular research funding from African countries is warranted. PMID:25836056

Wikipedia as a gateway to biomedical research: The relative distribution and use of citations in the English Wikipedia

PubMed Central

Willinsky, John M.; Steinberg, Ryan M.; Mietchen, Daniel; Wass, Joseph L.; Dong, Ting

2017-01-01

Wikipedia is a gateway to knowledge. However, the extent to which this gateway ends at Wikipedia or continues via supporting citations is unknown. Wikipedia’s gateway functionality has implications for information design and education, notably in medicine. This study aims to establish benchmarks for the relative distribution and referral (click) rate of citations—as indicated by presence of a Digital Object Identifier (DOI)—from Wikipedia, with a focus on medical citations. DOIs referred from the English Wikipedia in August 2016 were obtained from Crossref.org. Next, based on a DOI’s presence on a WikiProject Medicine page, all DOIs in Wikipedia were categorized as medical (WP:MED) or non-medical (non-WP:MED). Using this categorization, referred DOIs were classified as WP:MED, non-WP:MED, or BOTH, meaning the DOI may have been referred from either category. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Out of 5.2 million Wikipedia pages, 4.42% (n = 229,857) included at least one DOI. 68,870 were identified as WP:MED, with 22.14% (n = 15,250) featuring one or more DOIs. WP:MED pages featured on average 8.88 DOI citations per page, whereas non-WP:MED pages had on average 4.28 DOI citations. For DOIs only on WP:MED pages, a DOI was referred every 2,283 pageviews and for non-WP:MED pages every 2,467 pageviews. DOIs from BOTH pages accounted for 12% (n = 58,475). The referral of DOI citations found in BOTH could not be assigned to WP:MED or non-WP:MED, as the page from which the referral was made was not provided with the data. While these results cannot provide evidence of greater citation referral from WP:MED than non-WP:MED, they do provide benchmarks to assess strategies for changing referral patterns. These changes might include editors adopting new methods for designing and presenting citations or the introduction of teaching strategies that address the value of consulting citations as a tool for extending learning. PMID:29267345

Researcher Perspectives on Publication and Peer Review of Data

PubMed Central

Kratz, John Ernest; Strasser, Carly

2015-01-01

Data “publication” seeks to appropriate the prestige of authorship in the peer-reviewed literature to reward researchers who create useful and well-documented datasets. The scholarly communication community has embraced data publication as an incentive to document and share data. But, numerous new and ongoing experiments in implementation have not yet resolved what a data publication should be, when data should be peer-reviewed, or how data peer review should work. While researchers have been surveyed extensively regarding data management and sharing, their perceptions and expectations of data publication are largely unknown. To bring this important yet neglected perspective into the conversation, we surveyed ∼ 250 researchers across the sciences and social sciences– asking what expectations“data publication” raises and what features would be useful to evaluate the trustworthiness, evaluate the impact, and enhance the prestige of a data publication. We found that researcher expectations of data publication center on availability, generally through an open database or repository. Few respondents expected published data to be peer-reviewed, but peer-reviewed data enjoyed much greater trust and prestige. The importance of adequate metadata was acknowledged, in that almost all respondents expected data peer review to include evaluation of the data’s documentation. Formal citation in the reference list was affirmed by most respondents as the proper way to credit dataset creators. Citation count was viewed as the most useful measure of impact, but download count was seen as nearly as valuable. These results offer practical guidance for data publishers seeking to meet researcher expectations and enhance the value of published data. PMID:25706992

Open-Access Mega-Journals: A Bibliometric Profile.

PubMed

Wakeling, Simon; Willett, Peter; Creaser, Claire; Fry, Jenny; Pinfield, Stephen; Spezi, Valérie

2016-01-01

In this paper we present the first comprehensive bibliometric analysis of eleven open-access mega-journals (OAMJs). OAMJs are a relatively recent phenomenon, and have been characterised as having four key characteristics: large size; broad disciplinary scope; a Gold-OA business model; and a peer-review policy that seeks to determine only the scientific soundness of the research rather than evaluate the novelty or significance of the work. Our investigation focuses on four key modes of analysis: journal outputs (the number of articles published and changes in output over time); OAMJ author characteristics (nationalities and institutional affiliations); subject areas (the disciplinary scope of OAMJs, and variations in sub-disciplinary output); and citation profiles (the citation distributions of each OAMJ, and the impact of citing journals). We found that while the total output of the eleven mega-journals grew by 14.9% between 2014 and 2015, this growth is largely attributable to the increased output of Scientific Reports and Medicine. We also found substantial variation in the geographical distribution of authors. Several journals have a relatively high proportion of Chinese authors, and we suggest this may be linked to these journals' high Journal Impact Factors (JIFs). The mega-journals were also found to vary in subject scope, with several journals publishing disproportionately high numbers of articles in certain sub-disciplines. Our citation analsysis offers support for Björk & Catani's suggestion that OAMJs's citation distributions can be similar to those of traditional journals, while noting considerable variation in citation rates across the eleven titles. We conclude that while the OAMJ term is useful as a means of grouping journals which share a set of key characteristics, there is no such thing as a "typical" mega-journal, and we suggest several areas for additional research that might help us better understand the current and future role of OAMJs in scholarly communication.

Open-Access Mega-Journals: A Bibliometric Profile

PubMed Central

Willett, Peter; Creaser, Claire; Fry, Jenny; Pinfield, Stephen; Spezi, Valérie

2016-01-01

In this paper we present the first comprehensive bibliometric analysis of eleven open-access mega-journals (OAMJs). OAMJs are a relatively recent phenomenon, and have been characterised as having four key characteristics: large size; broad disciplinary scope; a Gold-OA business model; and a peer-review policy that seeks to determine only the scientific soundness of the research rather than evaluate the novelty or significance of the work. Our investigation focuses on four key modes of analysis: journal outputs (the number of articles published and changes in output over time); OAMJ author characteristics (nationalities and institutional affiliations); subject areas (the disciplinary scope of OAMJs, and variations in sub-disciplinary output); and citation profiles (the citation distributions of each OAMJ, and the impact of citing journals). We found that while the total output of the eleven mega-journals grew by 14.9% between 2014 and 2015, this growth is largely attributable to the increased output of Scientific Reports and Medicine. We also found substantial variation in the geographical distribution of authors. Several journals have a relatively high proportion of Chinese authors, and we suggest this may be linked to these journals’ high Journal Impact Factors (JIFs). The mega-journals were also found to vary in subject scope, with several journals publishing disproportionately high numbers of articles in certain sub-disciplines. Our citation analsysis offers support for Björk & Catani’s suggestion that OAMJs’s citation distributions can be similar to those of traditional journals, while noting considerable variation in citation rates across the eleven titles. We conclude that while the OAMJ term is useful as a means of grouping journals which share a set of key characteristics, there is no such thing as a “typical” mega-journal, and we suggest several areas for additional research that might help us better understand the current and future role of OAMJs in scholarly communication. PMID:27861511

Impact of GDP, spending on R&D, number of universities and scientific journals on research publications among Asian countries.

PubMed

Meo, Sultan Ayoub; Al Masri, Abeer A; Usmani, Adnan Mahmood; Memon, Almas Naeem; Zaidi, Syed Ziauddin

2013-01-01

This study aimed to compare the impact of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, spending on Research and Development (R&D), number of universities, and Indexed Scientific Journals on total number of research documents (papers), citations per document and Hirsch index (H-index) in various science and social science subjects among Asian countries. In this study, 40 Asian countries were included. The information regarding Asian countries, their GDP per capita, spending on R&D, total number of universities and indexed scientific journals were collected. We recorded the bibliometric indicators, including total number of research documents, citations per document and H-index in various science and social sciences subjects during the period 1996-2011. The main sources for information were World Bank, SCI-mago/Scopus and Web of Science; Thomson Reuters. The mean per capita GDP for all the Asian countries is 14448.31±2854.40 US$, yearly per capita spending on R&D 0.64±0.16 US$, number of universities 72.37±18.32 and mean number of ISI indexed journal per country is 17.97±7.35. The mean of research documents published in various science and social science subjects among all the Asian countries during the period 1996-2011 is 158086.92±69204.09; citations per document 8.67±0.48; and H-index 122.8±19.21. Spending on R&D, number of universities and indexed journals have a positive correlation with number of published documents, citations per document and H-index in various science and social science subjects. However, there was no association between the per capita GDP and research outcomes. The Asian countries who spend more on R&D have a large number of universities and scientific indexed journals produced more in research outcomes including total number of research publication, citations per documents and H-index in various science and social science subjects.

Weighing the impact (factor) of publishing in veterinary journals.

PubMed

Christopher, Mary M

2015-06-01

The journal in which you publish your research can have a major influence on the perceived value of your work and on your ability to reach certain audiences. The impact factor, a widely used metric of journal quality and prestige, has evolved into a benchmark of quality for institutions and graduate programs and, inappropriately, as a proxy for the quality of individual authors and articles, affecting tenure, promotion, and funding decisions. As a result, despite its many limitations, publishing decisions by authors often are based solely on a journal's impact factor. This can disadvantage journals in small disciplines, such as veterinary medicine, and limit the ability of authors to reach key audiences. In this article, factors that can influence the impact factor of a journal and its applicability, including precision, citation practices, article type, editorial policies, and size of the research community will be reviewed. The value and importance of veterinary journals such as the Journal of Veterinary Cardiology for reaching relevant audiences and for helping shape disciplinary specialties and influence clinical practice will also be discussed. Lastly, the efforts underway to develop alternative measures to assess the scientific quality of individual authors and articles, such as article-level metrics, as well as institutional measures of the economic and social impact of biomedical research will be considered. Judicious use of the impact factor and the implementation of new metrics for assessing the quality and societal relevance of veterinary research articles will benefit both authors and journals. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Open access publishing: a study of current practices in orthopaedic research.

PubMed

Sabharwal, Sanjeeve; Patel, Nirav; Johal, Karanjeev

2014-06-01

Open access (OA) publications have changed the paradigm of dissemination of scientific research. Their benefits to low-income countries underline their value; however, critics question exorbitant publication fees as well as their effect on the peer review process and research quality. This study reports on the prevalence of OA publishing in orthopaedic research and compares benchmark citation indices as well as evidence quality derived from OA journals with conventional subscription based orthopaedic journals. All 63 orthopaedic journals listed in ISI's Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Report (JCR) were examined. Bibliometric data attributed to each journal for the year 2012 was acquired from the JCR. Studies that fulfilled the criteria of level I evidence were identified for each journal within PubMed. Individual journal websites were reviewed to identify their open access policy. A total of 38 (60.3 %) journals did not offer any form of OA publishing; however, 20 (31.7 %) hybrid journals were identified which offered authors the choice to publish their work as OA if a publication fee was paid. Only five (8 %) journals published all their articles as OA. There was variability amongst the different publication fees for OA articles. Journals that published OA articles did not differ from subscription based journals on the basis of 2012 impact factor, citation number, self citation proportion or the volume of level I evidence published (p > 0.05). OA journals are present in orthopaedic research, though in small numbers. Over a third of orthopaedic journals catalogued in the ISI Web of Knowledge JCR® are hybrid journals that provide authors with the opportunity to publish their articles as OA after a publication fee is paid. This study suggests equivalent importance and quality of articles between OA and subscription based orthopaedic journals based on bibliometric data and the volume of level I evidence produced. Orthopaedic researchers must recognize the potential benefits of OA publishing and its emerging presence within the field. Further examination and consensus is required in orthopaedic research to generate an OA system that is robustly regulated and maintains research quality.

[Errors in bibliographic references in the Revista Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación: retrospective study of 1994].

PubMed

Avila, F J; Pensado, A; Esteva, C

1996-05-01

To evaluate the accuracy of bibliographic references in REVISTA ESPANOLA DE ANESTESIOLOGIA Y REANIMACION (REDAR) and compare it with other Spanish and international journals. One hundred references were selected at random from those published in REDAR during 1994. A citation was considered correct if there were no differences between it and the original article in any of 6 standard citation times, and if it complied with REDAR citation style. A citation was considered incorrect if there were in fact differences or if REDAR style was not followed. Errors that interfered with direct access to the original were considered serious. Also considered serious were the omission of the first author. Some type of error was detected in 53.9% of the references. Twelve contained a serious error, which on 5 occasions impeded finding the original article and on 6 occasions made direct access difficult. The first author was missing in 1 citation. Errors were found, in order of decreasing frequency, in authors, article titles, journal title, volume, pages and year. A single error was found in 28 citations, 2 were found in 12, 3 were found in 2 and more than 3 were found in 1. REDAR's rate of error in references is comparable to the rates of other Spanish journal, but it is nearly double that of international journals in anesthesiology with higher impact factors (Anesthesiology, Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia). An effort must be made by authors and editors to remedy the situation.

Bibliometric Assessment of European and Sub-Saharan African Research Output on Poverty-Related and Neglected Infectious Diseases from 2003 to 2011

PubMed Central

Gurney, Karen A.; Mgone, Charles S.

2015-01-01

Background The European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP) is a partnership of European and sub-Saharan African countries that aims to accelerate the development of medical interventions against poverty-related diseases (PRDs). A bibliometric analysis was conducted to 1) measure research output from European and African researchers on PRDs, 2) describe collaboration patterns, and 3) assess the citation impact of clinical research funded by EDCTP. Methodology/Principal Findings Disease-specific research publications were identified in Thomson Reuters Web of Science using search terms in titles, abstracts and keywords. Publication data, including citation counts, were extracted for 2003–2011. Analyses including output, share of global papers, normalised citation impact (NCI), and geographical distribution are presented. Data are presented as five-year moving averages. European EDCTP member countries accounted for ~33% of global research output in PRDs and sub-Saharan African countries for ~10% (2007–2011). Both regions contributed more to the global research output in malaria (43.4% and 22.2%, respectively). The overall number of PRD papers from sub-Saharan Africa increased markedly (>47%) since 2003, particularly for HIV/AIDS (102%) and tuberculosis (TB) (81%), and principally involving Southern and East Africa. For 2007–2011, European and sub-Saharan African research collaboration on PRDs was highly cited compared with the world average (NCI in brackets): HIV/AIDS 1.62 (NCI: 1.16), TB 2.11 (NCI: 1.06), malaria 1.81 (NCI: 1.22), and neglected infectious diseases 1.34 (NCI: 0.97). The NCI of EDCTP-funded papers for 2003–2011 was exceptionally high for HIV/AIDS (3.24), TB (4.08) and HIV/TB co-infection (5.10) compared with global research benchmarks (1.14, 1.05 and 1.35, respectively). Conclusions The volume and citation impact of papers from sub-Saharan Africa has increased since 2003, as has collaborative research between Europe and sub-Saharan Africa. >90% of publications from EDCTP-funded research were published in high-impact journals and are highly cited. These findings corroborate the benefit of collaborative research on PRDs. PMID:26262756

Bibliometric Assessment of European and Sub-Saharan African Research Output on Poverty-Related and Neglected Infectious Diseases from 2003 to 2011.

PubMed

Breugelmans, J Gabrielle; Makanga, Michael M; Cardoso, Ana Lúcia V; Mathewson, Sophie B; Sheridan-Jones, Bethan R; Gurney, Karen A; Mgone, Charles S

2015-08-01

The European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP) is a partnership of European and sub-Saharan African countries that aims to accelerate the development of medical interventions against poverty-related diseases (PRDs). A bibliometric analysis was conducted to 1) measure research output from European and African researchers on PRDs, 2) describe collaboration patterns, and 3) assess the citation impact of clinical research funded by EDCTP. Disease-specific research publications were identified in Thomson Reuters Web of Science using search terms in titles, abstracts and keywords. Publication data, including citation counts, were extracted for 2003-2011. Analyses including output, share of global papers, normalised citation impact (NCI), and geographical distribution are presented. Data are presented as five-year moving averages. European EDCTP member countries accounted for ~33% of global research output in PRDs and sub-Saharan African countries for ~10% (2007-2011). Both regions contributed more to the global research output in malaria (43.4% and 22.2%, respectively). The overall number of PRD papers from sub-Saharan Africa increased markedly (>47%) since 2003, particularly for HIV/AIDS (102%) and tuberculosis (TB) (81%), and principally involving Southern and East Africa. For 2007-2011, European and sub-Saharan African research collaboration on PRDs was highly cited compared with the world average (NCI in brackets): HIV/AIDS 1.62 (NCI: 1.16), TB 2.11 (NCI: 1.06), malaria 1.81 (NCI: 1.22), and neglected infectious diseases 1.34 (NCI: 0.97). The NCI of EDCTP-funded papers for 2003-2011 was exceptionally high for HIV/AIDS (3.24), TB (4.08) and HIV/TB co-infection (5.10) compared with global research benchmarks (1.14, 1.05 and 1.35, respectively). The volume and citation impact of papers from sub-Saharan Africa has increased since 2003, as has collaborative research between Europe and sub-Saharan Africa. >90% of publications from EDCTP-funded research were published in high-impact journals and are highly cited. These findings corroborate the benefit of collaborative research on PRDs.

Scientometric analysis of physics (1979-2008): A quantitative description of scientific impact

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Zheng, YanNing; Yuan, JunPeng; Pan, YunTao; Zhao, XiaoYuan

2011-01-01

Citations are a way to show how researchers build on existing research to further evolve research. The citation count is an indication of the influence of specific articles. The importance of citations means that it is valuable to analyze the articles that are cited the most. This research investigates highly-cited articles in physics (1979-2008) using citation data from the ISI Web of Science. In this study, 1544205 articles were examined. The objective of the analysis was to identify and list the highly-productive countries, institutions, authors, and fields in physics. Based on the analysis, it was found that the USA is the world leader in physics, and Japan has maintained the highest growth rate in physics research since 1990. Furthermore, the research focus at Bell Labs and IBM has played important roles in physics. A striking fact is that the five most active authors are all Japanese, but the five most active institutions are all in the USA. In fact, only The University of Tokyo is ranked among the top 11 institutions, and only American authors have single-author articles ranked among the top 19 articles. The highest-impact articles are distributed across 25 subjects categories. Physics, Multidisciplinary has 424 articles, and is ranked at No. 1 in total articles; followed by Physics, Condensed Matter. The study can provide science policy makers with a picture of innovation capability in this field and help them make better decisions. Hopefully, this study will stimulate useful discussion among scientists and research managers about future research directions.

Required Reading: The Most Impactful Articles in Endoscopic Endonasal Skull Base Surgery.

PubMed

Zhang, Michael; Singh, Harminder; Almodovar-Mercado, Gustavo J; Anand, Vijay K; Schwartz, Theodore H

2016-08-01

Endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery has become widely accepted in neurosurgery and otolaryngology over the last 15 years. However, there has yet to be a formal curation of the most impactful articles for an introductory curriculum to its technical evolution. The Science Citation Index Expanded was used to generate a citation rank list (October 2015) on articles relevant to endoscopic skull base surgery. The top 35 cited articles overall, as well as the top 15 since 2009, were identified. Journal, year, author, study population, article format, and level of evidence were compiled. Additional surgeon experts were polled and made recommendations for significant contributions to the literature. The top 35 publications ranged from 98 to 467 citations and were published in 10 different journals. Four articles had more than 250 citations. A period of frequent contribution occurred between 2005 and 2009, when 21/35 reports were published. 18/35 articles were case series, and 13/35 were technical reports. There were 11/35 articles focused primarily on pituitary surgery and 10/35 on extrasellar lesions. The top 15 articles since 2009 had 8/15 articles focused on extrasellar lesions. Polled surgeons consistently identified the most prominently cited articles, and their recommendations drew attention to cerebrospinal fluid leak as well as extrasellar management. Identification of the most cited works within endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery shows greater anatomic access and safety over the last 2 decades. These articles can serve as an educational tool for novices or midlevel practitioners wishing to obtain a greater understanding of the field. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Impact of clinical fellowships on academic productivity in departments of surgery.

PubMed

Valsangkar, Nakul P; Liang, Tiffany W; Martin, Paul J; Mayo, John S; Rosati, Carlo Maria; Feliciano, David V; Zimmers, Teresa A; Koniaris, Leonidas G

2016-12-01

Research and innovation are crucial to advancements in medicine and improvements in patient care. The contribution of surgical fellowships to scholarly productivity is unclear. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of subspecialty fellowships on academic output in departments of surgery. This cross-sectional study examined fellowships offered at the top 50 university-based National Institutes of Health-funded and top 5 academically prolific hospital-based departments of surgery. Publications, citations, and National Institutes of Health funding history were determined for 4,015 faculty. χ 2 and t tests were used as appropriate. Cardiothoracic surgery fellowships are offered at all departments, while other surgical fellowships are offered in 52 of 55 departments (96.4%). Median department publications/citations increased with the number of fellowships offered in addition to cardiothoracic surgery: no fellowship (27 ± 93/437 ± 2,509), 1-3 fellowships (34 ± 90/559 ± 3,046), and 4 or more fellowships (40 ± 97/716 ± 3,200, P < .05). Significant divisional improvements in publications/citations and National Institutes of Health funding were observed for those with fellowship programs in pediatric, breast, and plastic surgery (P < .05). No differences in departmental National Institutes of Health funding rates were observed based on number of fellowships offered. Based on publications/citations and National Institutes of Health funding, it seems that select fellowships are associated with improved scholarly activity. Departments may wish to consider the academic benefits of offering these fellowship types. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Global Benchmarking of Marketing Doctoral Program Faculty and Institutions by Subarea

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Elbeck, Matt; Vander Schee, Brian A.

2014-01-01

This study benchmarks marketing doctoral programs worldwide in five popular subareas by faculty and institutional scholarly impact. A multi-item approach identifies a collection of top-tier scholarly journals for each subarea, while citation data over the decade 2003 to 2012 identify high scholarly impact marketing faculty by subarea used to…

A Core Journal Decision Model Based on Weighted Page Rank

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wang, Hei-Chia; Chou, Ya-lin; Guo, Jiunn-Liang

2011-01-01

Purpose: The paper's aim is to propose a core journal decision method, called the local impact factor (LIF), which can evaluate the requirements of the local user community by combining both the access rate and the weighted impact factor, and by tracking citation information on the local users' articles. Design/methodology/approach: Many…

Wind-Wildlife Impacts Literature Database (WILD)(Fact Sheet)

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Not Available

The Wind-Wildlife Impacts Literature Database (WILD), developed and maintained by the National Wind Technology Center (NWTC) at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), is comprised of over 1,000 citations pertaining to the effects of land-based wind, offshore wind, marine and hydrokinetic, power lines, and communication and television towers on wildlife.

Citation classics in radiology journals: the 100 top-cited articles, 1945-2012.

PubMed

Yoon, Dae Young; Yun, Eun Joo; Ku, You Jin; Baek, Sora; Lim, Kyoung Ja; Seo, Young Lan; Yie, Miyeon

2013-09-01

The number of citations an article receives after its publication reflects its impact in the scientific community. The aim of this study was to identify and characterize the 100 top-cited articles published in radiology journals. The top-cited articles published in 12 radiology journals were identified using the database of Science Citation Index Expanded (1945-2012). The 100 top-cited articles were selected and analyzed with regard to the number of citations, year of publication, publishing journal, authorship, institution and country of origin, type of article, radiologic subspecialty, main topic, and radiologic technique. The 100 top-cited articles were published in eight radiology journals, led by Radiology (n=67) and followed by the American Journal of Roentgenology (n=11). These articles were published between 1939 and 2006 with a mean of 664.3 citations per article (range, 371-6931). Seventy-eight articles were published after 1979, 57 originated from the United States, and 69 were original articles. The most common subspecialties of study were interventional radiology (n=19), neuroradiology (n=15), and breast imaging (n=11). The main topics of articles were radiofrequency ablation of hepatic tumors (n=9), followed by receiver operating characteristic curves (n=6). Our study presents a detailed list and analysis of the 100 top-cited articles published in radiology journals, which provides insight into historical developments in the field of radiology.

The meta-analytic big bang.

PubMed

Shadish, William R; Lecy, Jesse D

2015-09-01

This article looks at the impact of meta-analysis and then explores why meta-analysis was developed at the time and by the scholars it did in the social sciences in the 1970s. For the first problem, impact, it examines the impact of meta-analysis using citation network analysis. The impact is seen in the sciences, arts and humanities, and on such contemporaneous developments as multilevel modeling, medical statistics, qualitative methods, program evaluation, and single-case design. Using a constrained snowball sample of citations, we highlight key articles that are either most highly cited or most central to the systematic review network. Then, the article examines why meta-analysis came to be in the 1970s in the social sciences through the work of Gene Glass, Robert Rosenthal, and Frank Schmidt, each of whom developed similar theories of meta-analysis at about the same time. The article ends by explaining how Simonton's chance configuration theory and Campbell's evolutionary epistemology can illuminate why meta-analysis occurred with these scholars when it did and not in medical sciences. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Growing Stem Cells: The Impact of Federal Funding Policy on the U.S. Scientific Frontier

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Furman, Jeffrey L.; Murray, Fiona; Stern, Scott

2012-01-01

This paper articulates a citation-based approach to science policy evaluation and employs that approach to investigate the impact of the United States' 2001 policy regarding the federal funding of human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research. We evaluate the impact of the policy on the level of U.S. hESC research, the U.S. position at the knowledge…

Data reuse and the open data citation advantage

PubMed Central

Vision, Todd J.

2013-01-01

Background. Attribution to the original contributor upon reuse of published data is important both as a reward for data creators and to document the provenance of research findings. Previous studies have found that papers with publicly available datasets receive a higher number of citations than similar studies without available data. However, few previous analyses have had the statistical power to control for the many variables known to predict citation rate, which has led to uncertain estimates of the “citation benefit”. Furthermore, little is known about patterns in data reuse over time and across datasets. Method and Results. Here, we look at citation rates while controlling for many known citation predictors and investigate the variability of data reuse. In a multivariate regression on 10,555 studies that created gene expression microarray data, we found that studies that made data available in a public repository received 9% (95% confidence interval: 5% to 13%) more citations than similar studies for which the data was not made available. Date of publication, journal impact factor, open access status, number of authors, first and last author publication history, corresponding author country, institution citation history, and study topic were included as covariates. The citation benefit varied with date of dataset deposition: a citation benefit was most clear for papers published in 2004 and 2005, at about 30%. Authors published most papers using their own datasets within two years of their first publication on the dataset, whereas data reuse papers published by third-party investigators continued to accumulate for at least six years. To study patterns of data reuse directly, we compiled 9,724 instances of third party data reuse via mention of GEO or ArrayExpress accession numbers in the full text of papers. The level of third-party data use was high: for 100 datasets deposited in year 0, we estimated that 40 papers in PubMed reused a dataset by year 2, 100 by year 4, and more than 150 data reuse papers had been published by year 5. Data reuse was distributed across a broad base of datasets: a very conservative estimate found that 20% of the datasets deposited between 2003 and 2007 had been reused at least once by third parties. Conclusion. After accounting for other factors affecting citation rate, we find a robust citation benefit from open data, although a smaller one than previously reported. We conclude there is a direct effect of third-party data reuse that persists for years beyond the time when researchers have published most of the papers reusing their own data. Other factors that may also contribute to the citation benefit are considered. We further conclude that, at least for gene expression microarray data, a substantial fraction of archived datasets are reused, and that the intensity of dataset reuse has been steadily increasing since 2003. PMID:24109559

The kinship or k-index as an antidote against the toxic effects of h-indices.

PubMed

Molinié, Antoinette; Bodenhausen, Geoffrey

2011-01-01

In a bilingual paper entitled 'Bibliometrics as weapons of mass citation--La bibliométrie comme arme de citation massive', recently translated into English, we have argued that the current fashion of ranking people, papers and journals is anything but harmless. The point was forcefully supported by Richard Ernst in a post-face entitled 'The Follies of Citation Indices and Academic Ranking Lists. We received a surprising number of passionate responses, such as 'It's written out of my heart' (TH); 'Je soutiens cette entreprise courageuse de tout coeur' (VT); 'Impact Faktoren sind ein Marktinstrument gewisser Verlage (FS); 'II y a un combat à mener' (SB). Some thoughtful responses have been incorporated into this Essay, albeit in attenuated form. We suggest that the 'fertility' of individual scientists be appreciated in terms of kinship rather than through personalized indices.

The impact of health and safety committees. A study based on survey, interview, and Occupational Safety and Health Administration data.

PubMed

Boden, L I; Hall, J A; Levenstein, C; Punnett, L

1984-11-01

In a study conducted to determine if the existence of a joint labor-management health and safety committee (HSC) was correlated with either the number of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) complaints or hazardousness, as measured by OSHA serious citations, virtually no effect could be detected in a sample of 127 Massachusetts manufacturing firms. At a sample of 13 firms, interviews of HSC members were conducted. Committee attributes and perceptions about committee effectiveness were compared with the number of OSHA complaints and serious citations. There were fewer complaints and fewer serious citations at firms with HSCs that were perceived as effective. Results of the study suggest that the objective attributes of the committee may be less important to its success than the commitment of management and labor to solving workplace safety problems.

Performance of Malaysian Medical Journals

PubMed Central

Abrizah, Abdullah

2016-01-01

Indexation status matters for scholarly journal prestige and trust. The performance of Malaysian medical journals at the international level is gauged through the global citation databases, and at the national level through MyCite, a national citation indexing system. The performance indicators include journals publication productivity, the citations they garner, and their scores on other bibliometric indices such as journal impact factor (IF), and h-index. There is a growing consciousness amongst journal editorials to improve quality and increase chances of getting indexed in MyCite. Although it is now possible to gauge journal performance within Malaysia, through MyCite, the government and public are concerned about journal performance in international databases. Knowing the performance of journals in MyCite will help the editors and publishers to improve the quality and visibility of Malaysian journals and strategise to bring their journal to the international level of indexation. PMID:27547108

Citation analysis of Acta Dermatovenerologica Alpina, Pannonica et Adriatica: 1992-2011.

PubMed

Ostrbenk, Anja; Skamperle, Mateja; Poljak, Mario

2012-09-01

Acta Dermatovenerologica Alpina, Pannonica et Adriatica is small regional professional journal that started publishing in 1992. Despite the journal's relatively narrow readership, it has significantly improved its quality and global profile during the last 20 years, as shown in this citation analysis update. Since 1992, 654 bibliographical items have been published. Among these, 545 (83.4%) were considered WoS citable items and 109 (16.6%) WoS noncitable items. Since 2008, 90% of all published items have been considered WoS citable items and received an average of 1.9 citations per item. The predicted Acta Dermatovenerol APA impact factor calculated using data from a Cited Reference search of Thomson Scientific's Web of Science has shown steep and continuous increase since 2006, when the journal acquired full indexing status in Index Medicus/Medline, and has been above 0.5 since 2008.

A Bibliometric History of the Journal of Psychology Between 1936 and 2015.

PubMed

Tur-Porcar, Ana; Mas-Tur, Alicia; Merigó, José M; Roig-Tierno, Norat; Watt, John

2018-05-19

The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied is a leading international journal in psychology dating back to 1935. This study examines its publications since its creation utilizing a bibliometric analysis. The primary objective is to provide a complete overview of the key factors affecting the journal. This analysis includes such key issues as the publication and citation structure of the journal, its most cited articles, and the leading authors, institutions, and countries referenced in the journal. The work uses the Scopus database to classify the bibliographic material. Additionally, the analysis provides a graphical mapping of the bibliographic data by using visualization of similarities viewer software. This software uses several bibliometric techniques including co-citation, bibliographic coupling and co-occurrence of keywords. The Journal of Psychology is strongly connected to most of the current leading journals in psychology, and currently has a 5-year impact factor of 1.77 (Thomson Reuters, 2015 Journal Citation Reports).

Qualitative medical sociology: what are its crowning achievements?

PubMed Central

Chard, J A; Lilford, R J; Court, B V

1997-01-01

Doctors and epidemiologists seldom read or cite qualitative medical sociology; it is little published in medical journals. A large number of articles bewail this lack and provide arguments explaining and justifying the subject. Any examples used in such articles are selected ad hoc. We made a systematic search for the literature and used citation analysis to select the world's top 100 articles. We analysed this trawl and provide resumés of a selection from the 'classics'. Mental health and the organization of medicine are the themes within medical sociology with highest impact. Much highly cited work consists of historical and theoretical analysis done 'at the desk' rather than observation or interview 'in the field'. Citation rates, even for the most famous works in medical sociology, are a small fraction of those for high impact biomedical research. PMID:9496271

Randomized clinical trials in implant therapy: relationships among methodological, statistical, clinical, paratextual features and number of citations.

PubMed

Nieri, Michele; Clauser, Carlo; Franceschi, Debora; Pagliaro, Umberto; Saletta, Daniele; Pini-Prato, Giovanpaolo

2007-08-01

The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationships among reported methodological, statistical, clinical and paratextual variables of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in implant therapy, and their influence on subsequent research. The material consisted of the RCTs in implant therapy published through the end of the year 2000. Methodological, statistical, clinical and paratextual features of the articles were assessed and recorded. The perceived clinical relevance was subjectively evaluated by an experienced clinician on anonymous abstracts. The impact on research was measured by the number of citations found in the Science Citation Index. A new statistical technique (Structural learning of Bayesian Networks) was used to assess the relationships among the considered variables. Descriptive statistics revealed that the reported methodology and statistics of RCTs in implant therapy were defective. Follow-up of the studies was generally short. The perceived clinical relevance appeared to be associated with the objectives of the studies and with the number of published images in the original articles. The impact on research was related to the nationality of the involved institutions and to the number of published images. RCTs in implant therapy (until 2000) show important methodological and statistical flaws and may not be appropriate for guiding clinicians in their practice. The methodological and statistical quality of the studies did not appear to affect their impact on practice and research. Bayesian Networks suggest new and unexpected relationships among the methodological, statistical, clinical and paratextual features of RCTs.

Publication trends in the medical informatics literature: 20 years of "Medical Informatics" in MeSH

PubMed Central

2009-01-01

Background The purpose of this study is to identify publication output, and research areas, as well as descriptively and quantitatively characterize the field of medical informatics through publication trend analysis over a twenty year period (1987–2006). Methods A bibliometric analysis of medical informatics citations indexed in Medline was performed using publication trends, journal frequency, impact factors, MeSH term frequencies and characteristics of citations. Results There were 77,023 medical informatics articles published during this 20 year period in 4,644 unique journals. The average annual article publication growth rate was 12%. The 50 identified medical informatics MeSH terms are rarely assigned together to the same document and are almost exclusively paired with a non-medical informatics MeSH term, suggesting a strong interdisciplinary trend. Trends in citations, journals, and MeSH categories of medical informatics output for the 20-year period are summarized. Average impact factor scores and weighted average impact factor scores increased over the 20-year period with two notable growth periods. Conclusion There is a steadily growing presence and increasing visibility of medical informatics literature over the years. Patterns in research output that seem to characterize the historic trends and current components of the field of medical informatics suggest it may be a maturing discipline, and highlight specific journals in which the medical informatics literature appears most frequently, including general medical journals as well as informatics-specific journals. PMID:19159472

Relative Citation Ratio of Top Twenty Macedonian Biomedical Scientists in PubMed: A New Metric that Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level.

PubMed

Spiroski, Mirko

2016-06-15

The aim of this study was to analyze relative citation ratio (RCR) of top twenty Macedonian biomedical scientists with a new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level. Top twenty Macedonian biomedical scientists were identified by GoPubMed on the base of the number of deposited abstracts in PubMed, corrected with the data from previously published paper, and completed with the Macedonian biomedical scientists working in countries outside the Republic of Macedonia, but born or previously worked in the country. iCite was used as a tool to access a dashboard of bibliometrics for papers associated with a portfolio. The biggest number of top twenty Macedonian biomedical scientists has RCR lower than one. Only four Macedonian biomedical scientists have bigger RCR in comparison with those in PubMed. The most prominent RCR of 2.29 has Rosoklija G. RCR of the most influenced individual papers deposited in PubMed has shown the biggest value for the paper of Efremov D (35.19). This paper has the biggest number of authors (860). It is necessary to accept top twenty Macedonian biomedical scientists as an example of new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level, rather than qualification of the best Macedonian biomedical scientists.

Database citation in supplementary data linked to Europe PubMed Central full text biomedical articles.

PubMed

Kafkas, Şenay; Kim, Jee-Hyub; Pi, Xingjun; McEntyre, Johanna R

2015-01-01

In this study, we present an analysis of data citation practices in full text research articles and their corresponding supplementary data files, made available in the Open Access set of articles from Europe PubMed Central. Our aim is to investigate whether supplementary data files should be considered as a source of information for integrating the literature with biomolecular databases. Using text-mining methods to identify and extract a variety of core biological database accession numbers, we found that the supplemental data files contain many more database citations than the body of the article, and that those citations often take the form of a relatively small number of articles citing large collections of accession numbers in text-based files. Moreover, citation of value-added databases derived from submission databases (such as Pfam, UniProt or Ensembl) is common, demonstrating the reuse of these resources as datasets in themselves. All the database accession numbers extracted from the supplementary data are publicly accessible from http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11771. Our study suggests that supplementary data should be considered when linking articles with data, in curation pipelines, and in information retrieval tasks in order to make full use of the entire research article. These observations highlight the need to improve the management of supplemental data in general, in order to make this information more discoverable and useful.

[Analysis on acupuncture related articles published in periodicals in science citation index (SCI) in 2008].

PubMed

Wang, Chao; He, Wen-Ju; Guo, Yi

2010-09-01

Acupuncture related articles published in periodicals in Science Citation Index (SCI) in 2008 were summarized and analyzed. About 583 articles were collected using "acupuncture" and "in 2008" as keywords in the Web of Science data base by information retrieval. These papers were summarized and analyzed from various aspects of country, language, subject category, literature type, publication sources, impact factor, research method, acupoints, disease category and needling methods by using Excel software combined with manual sorting of the literature, the aim is to provide a reference for domestic acupuncture research.

Academic Productivity in Psychiatry: Benchmarks for the H-Index.

PubMed

MacMaster, Frank P; Swansburg, Rose; Rittenbach, Katherine

2017-08-01

Bibliometrics play an increasingly critical role in the assessment of faculty for promotion and merit increases. Bibliometrics is the statistical analysis of publications, aimed at evaluating their impact. The objective of this study is to describe h-index and citation benchmarks in academic psychiatry. Faculty lists were acquired from online resources for all academic departments of psychiatry listed as having residency training programs in Canada (as of June 2016). Potential authors were then searched on Web of Science (Thomson Reuters) for their corresponding h-index and total number of citations. The sample included 1683 faculty members in academic psychiatry departments. Restricted to those with a rank of assistant, associate, or full professor resulted in 1601 faculty members (assistant = 911, associate = 387, full = 303). h-index and total citations differed significantly by academic rank. Both were highest in the full professor rank, followed by associate, then assistant. The range in each, however, was large. This study provides the initial benchmarks for the h-index and total citations in academic psychiatry. Regardless of any controversies or criticisms of bibliometrics, they are increasingly influencing promotion, merit increases, and grant support. As such, benchmarking by specialties is needed in order to provide needed context.

Evaluation of Scientific Outputs of Kashan University of Medical Sciences in Scopus Citation Database based on Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley Scientometric Measures

PubMed Central

Batooli, Zahra; Ravandi, Somaye Nadi; Bidgoli, Mohammad Sabahi

2016-01-01

Introduction It is essential to evaluate the impact of scientific publications through citation analysis in citation indexes. In addition, scientometric measures of social media also should be assessed. These measures include how many times the publications were read, viewed, and downloaded. The present study aimed to assess the scientific output of scholars at Kashan University of Medical Sciences by the end of March 2014 based on scientometric measures of Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley. Methods A survey method was used to study the articles published in Scopus journals by scholars at Kashan University of Medical Sciences by the end of March 2014. The required data were collected from Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Also, the Spearman correlation was used between the number of views of articles in ResearchGate with citation number of the articles in Scopus and reading frequency of the articles in Mendeley with citation number in Scopus were examined using the Spearman correlation in SPSS 16. Results Five-hundred and thirty-three articles were indexed in the Scopus Citation Database by the end of March 2014. Collectively, those articles were cited 1,315 times. The articles were covered by ResearchGate (74%) more than Mendeley (44%). In addition, 98% of the articles indexed in ResearchGate and 92% of the articles indexed in Mendeley were viewed at least once. The results showed that there was a positive correlation between the number of views of the articles in ResearchGate and Mendeley and the number of citations of the articles in Scopus. Conclusion Coverage and the number of visitors were higher in ResearchGate than in Mendeley. The increase in the number of views of articles in ResearchGate and Mendeley also increased the number of citations of the papers. Social networks, such as ResearchGate and Mendeley, also can be used as tools for the evaluation of academics and scholars based on the scientific research they have conducted. PMID:27054017

Evaluation of Scientific Outputs of Kashan University of Medical Sciences in Scopus Citation Database based on Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley Scientometric Measures.

PubMed

Batooli, Zahra; Ravandi, Somaye Nadi; Bidgoli, Mohammad Sabahi

2016-02-01

It is essential to evaluate the impact of scientific publications through citation analysis in citation indexes. In addition, scientometric measures of social media also should be assessed. These measures include how many times the publications were read, viewed, and downloaded. The present study aimed to assess the scientific output of scholars at Kashan University of Medical Sciences by the end of March 2014 based on scientometric measures of Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley. A survey method was used to study the articles published in Scopus journals by scholars at Kashan University of Medical Sciences by the end of March 2014. The required data were collected from Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Also, the Spearman correlation was used between the number of views of articles in ResearchGate with citation number of the articles in Scopus and reading frequency of the articles in Mendeley with citation number in Scopus were examined using the Spearman correlation in SPSS 16. Five-hundred and thirty-three articles were indexed in the Scopus Citation Database by the end of March 2014. Collectively, those articles were cited 1,315 times. The articles were covered by ResearchGate (74%) more than Mendeley (44%). In addition, 98% of the articles indexed in ResearchGate and 92% of the articles indexed in Mendeley were viewed at least once. The results showed that there was a positive correlation between the number of views of the articles in ResearchGate and Mendeley and the number of citations of the articles in Scopus. Coverage and the number of visitors were higher in ResearchGate than in Mendeley. The increase in the number of views of articles in ResearchGate and Mendeley also increased the number of citations of the papers. Social networks, such as ResearchGate and Mendeley, also can be used as tools for the evaluation of academics and scholars based on the scientific research they have conducted.

The 100 most cited articles in metastatic spine disease.

PubMed

Cohen, Jonathan; Alan, Nima; Zhou, James; Kojo Hamilton, D

2016-08-01

OBJECTIVE Despite the growing neurosurgical literature, a subset of pioneering studies have significantly impacted the field of metastatic spine disease. The purpose of this study was to identify and analyze the 100 most frequently cited articles in the field. METHODS A keyword search using the Thomson Reuters Web of Science was conducted to identify articles relevant to the field of metastatic spine disease. The results were filtered based on title and abstract analysis to identify the 100 most cited articles. Statistical analysis was used to characterize journal frequency, past and current citations, citation distribution over time, and author frequency. RESULTS The total number of citations for the final 100 articles ranged from 74 to 1169. Articles selected for the final list were published between 1940 and 2009. The years in which the greatest numbers of top-100 studies were published were 1990 and 2005, and the greatest number of citations occurred in 2012. The majority of articles were published in the journals Spine (15), Cancer (11), and the Journal of Neurosurgery (9). Forty-four individuals were listed as authors on 2 articles, 9 were listed as authors on 3 articles, and 2 were listed as authors on 4 articles in the top 100 list. The most cited article was the work by Batson (1169 citations) that was published in 1940 and described the role of the vertebral veins in the spread of metastases. The second most cited article was Patchell's 2005 study (594 citations) discussing decompressive resection of spinal cord metastases. The third most cited article was the 1978 study by Gilbert that evaluated treatment of epidural spinal cord compression due to metastatic tumor (560 citations). CONCLUSIONS The field of metastatic spine disease has witnessed numerous milestones and so it is increasingly important to recognize studies that have influenced the field. In this bibliographic study the authors identified and analyzed the most influential articles in the field of metastatic spine disease.

Performance Benchmarks for Scholarly Metrics Associated with Fisheries and Wildlife Faculty

PubMed Central

Swihart, Robert K.; Sundaram, Mekala; Höök, Tomas O.; DeWoody, J. Andrew; Kellner, Kenneth F.

2016-01-01

Research productivity and impact are often considered in professional evaluations of academics, and performance metrics based on publications and citations increasingly are used in such evaluations. To promote evidence-based and informed use of these metrics, we collected publication and citation data for 437 tenure-track faculty members at 33 research-extensive universities in the United States belonging to the National Association of University Fisheries and Wildlife Programs. For each faculty member, we computed 8 commonly used performance metrics based on numbers of publications and citations, and recorded covariates including academic age (time since Ph.D.), sex, percentage of appointment devoted to research, and the sub-disciplinary research focus. Standardized deviance residuals from regression models were used to compare faculty after accounting for variation in performance due to these covariates. We also aggregated residuals to enable comparison across universities. Finally, we tested for temporal trends in citation practices to assess whether the “law of constant ratios”, used to enable comparison of performance metrics between disciplines that differ in citation and publication practices, applied to fisheries and wildlife sub-disciplines when mapped to Web of Science Journal Citation Report categories. Our regression models reduced deviance by ¼ to ½. Standardized residuals for each faculty member, when combined across metrics as a simple average or weighted via factor analysis, produced similar results in terms of performance based on percentile rankings. Significant variation was observed in scholarly performance across universities, after accounting for the influence of covariates. In contrast to findings for other disciplines, normalized citation ratios for fisheries and wildlife sub-disciplines increased across years. Increases were comparable for all sub-disciplines except ecology. We discuss the advantages and limitations of our methods, illustrate their use when applied to new data, and suggest future improvements. Our benchmarking approach may provide a useful tool to augment detailed, qualitative assessment of performance. PMID:27152838

Performance Benchmarks for Scholarly Metrics Associated with Fisheries and Wildlife Faculty.

PubMed

Swihart, Robert K; Sundaram, Mekala; Höök, Tomas O; DeWoody, J Andrew; Kellner, Kenneth F

2016-01-01

Research productivity and impact are often considered in professional evaluations of academics, and performance metrics based on publications and citations increasingly are used in such evaluations. To promote evidence-based and informed use of these metrics, we collected publication and citation data for 437 tenure-track faculty members at 33 research-extensive universities in the United States belonging to the National Association of University Fisheries and Wildlife Programs. For each faculty member, we computed 8 commonly used performance metrics based on numbers of publications and citations, and recorded covariates including academic age (time since Ph.D.), sex, percentage of appointment devoted to research, and the sub-disciplinary research focus. Standardized deviance residuals from regression models were used to compare faculty after accounting for variation in performance due to these covariates. We also aggregated residuals to enable comparison across universities. Finally, we tested for temporal trends in citation practices to assess whether the "law of constant ratios", used to enable comparison of performance metrics between disciplines that differ in citation and publication practices, applied to fisheries and wildlife sub-disciplines when mapped to Web of Science Journal Citation Report categories. Our regression models reduced deviance by ¼ to ½. Standardized residuals for each faculty member, when combined across metrics as a simple average or weighted via factor analysis, produced similar results in terms of performance based on percentile rankings. Significant variation was observed in scholarly performance across universities, after accounting for the influence of covariates. In contrast to findings for other disciplines, normalized citation ratios for fisheries and wildlife sub-disciplines increased across years. Increases were comparable for all sub-disciplines except ecology. We discuss the advantages and limitations of our methods, illustrate their use when applied to new data, and suggest future improvements. Our benchmarking approach may provide a useful tool to augment detailed, qualitative assessment of performance.