Social media impact factor: the top ten dermatology journals on facebook and twitter

OpenAIRE

Karimkhani, Chante; Gamble, Ryan; Dellavalle, Robert P

2014-01-01

Academic journals are mainly rated according to their impact factors. However, considering the enormous worldwide impact of social media, journals and potential authors may want to take social media impact into account.

Social media impact factor: the top ten dermatology journals on Facebook and Twitter.

Science.gov (United States)

Karimkhani, Chante; Gamble, Ryan; Dellavalle, Robert P

2014-04-16

Academic journals are mainly rated according to their impact factors. However, considering the enormous worldwide impact of social media, journals and potential authors may want to take social media impact into account.

Full Open Access Journals Have Increased Impact Factors

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Shu-Kun Lin

2009-06-01

Full Text Available We are pleased to report the increase of the impact factors of MDPI journals during 2007 and 2008. In 2005 and part of 2006, the use of a two tier publication system, whereby we offered full Open Access publication to those authors willing to contribute financially to support this option, while providing the alternative choice of free publication without Open Access for those authors who preferred not to pay, resulted in the obviously decreased impact factors seen in 2006 [...

Factors associated with the Journal Impact Factor (JIF for Urology and Nephrology Journals

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Joseph M. Sewell

2015-12-01

Full Text Available Purpose: The Journal Impact Factor (JIF is an index used to compare a journal's quality among academic journals and it is commonly used as a proxy for journal quality. We sought to examine the JIF in order to elucidate the main predictors of the index while generating awareness among scientific community regarding need to modify the index calculation in the attempt to turn it more accurate. Materials and Methods: Under the Urology and Nephrology category in the Journal Citations Report Website, the top 17 Journals by JIF in 2011 were chosen for the study. All manuscripts’ abstracts published from 2009-2010 were reviewed; each article was categorized based on its research design (Retrospective, Review, etc. T and correlation tests were performed for categorical and continuous variables respectively. The JIF was the dependent variable. All variables were then included in a multivariate model. Results: 23,012 articles from seventeen journals were evaluated with a median of 1,048 (range=78-6,342 articles per journal. Journals with a society affiliation were associated with a higher JIF (p=0.05. Self-citations (rho=0.57, p=0.02, citations for citable articles (rho=0.73, p=0.001, citations to non-citable articles (rho=0.65, p=0.0046, and retrospective studies (rho=-0.51, p=0.03 showed a strong correlation. Slight modifications to include the non-citable articles in the denominator yield drastic changes in the JIF and the ranking of the journals. Conclusion: The JIF appears to be closely associated with the number of citable articles published. A change in the formula for calculating JIF to include all types of published articles in the denominator would result in a more accurate representation.

The top-ten in journal impact factor manipulation.

Science.gov (United States)

Falagas, Matthew E; Alexiou, Vangelis G

2008-01-01

A considerable part of the scientific community is, at least to some degree, involved in the "impact factor game". Editors strive to increase their journals' impact factor (IF) in order to gain influence in the fields of basic and applied research and scientists seek to profit from the "added value" of publishing in top IF journals. In this article we point out the most common "tricks" of engineering and manipulating the IF undertaken by a portion of professionals of the scientific publishing industry. They attempt to increase the nominator or decrease the denominator of the IF equation by taking advantage of certain design flaws and disadvantages of the IF that permit a degree of artificial and arbitrary inflation. Some of these practices, if not scientifically unethical, are at least questionable and should be abandoned. Editors and publishers should strive for quality through fair and thoughtful selection of papers forwarded for peer review and editorial comments that enhance the quality and scientific accuracy of a manuscript.

Impact factor evolution of nursing research journals: 2009 to 2014.

Science.gov (United States)

Cáceres, Macarena C; Guerrero-Martín, Jorge; González-Morales, Borja; Pérez-Civantos, Demetrio V; Carreto-Lemus, Maria A; Durán-Gómez, Noelia

The use of bibliometric indicators (impact factor [IF], impact index, h-index, etc.) is now believed to be a fundamental measure of the quality of scientific research output. In this context, the presence of scientific nursing journals in international databases and the factors influencing their impact ratings is being widely analyzed. The aim of this study was to analyze the presence of scientific nursing journals in international databases and track the changes in their IF. A secondary analysis was carried out on data for the years 2009 to 2014 held in the JCR database (subject category: nursing). Additionally, the presence of scientific nursing journals in Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, and SJR was analyzed. During the period studied, the number of journals indexed in the JCR under the nursing subject category increased from 70 in 2009 (mean IF: 0.99, standard deviation: 0.53) to 115 in 2014 (mean IF: 1.04, standard deviation: 0.42), of which only 70 were listed for the full six years. Although mean IF showed an upward trend throughout this time, no statistically significant differences were found in the variations to this figure. Although IF and other bibliometric indicators have their limitations, it is nonetheless true that bibliometry is now the most widely used tool for evaluating scientific output in all disciplines, including nursing, highlighting the importance of being familiar with how they are calculated and their significance when deciding the journal or journals in which to publish the results of our research. That said, it is also necessary to consider other possible alternative ways of assessing the quality and impact of scientific contributions. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Impact factor, eigenfactor, article influence, scopus SNIP, and SCImage journal rank of occupational therapy journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Brown, Ted; Gutman, Sharon A

2018-05-18

Journals are currently assessed and ranked using a number of different quantitative performance metrics. To compare and correlate the publication metrics of English-language occupational therapy journals published in 2015. Bibliometric data was sourced for 14 English-language occupational therapy journals including the Journal Citations Report (JCR) 2-year impact factor (IF), Eigenfactor Score (EFS), Article Influence Score (AIS), Scopus Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), Scopus Citescore, and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) score. The JCR, Scopus, and SJR 2015 bibliometric data were correlated. The top six English-language occupational therapy journals in relation to JCR IF, EFS, AIS, SNIP, Citescore, SJR score, and SJR IIF were AJOT, AOTJ, POPT, CJOT, SJOT, and BJOT. JCR IF, EFS, JCR AIS, SNIP, Citescore, SJR score and SJR IIF were all significantly correlated with coefficients ranging from 0.751 to 0.961 (p article rankings rather than the singular use of IF scores that currently and frequently occurs in many jurisdictions.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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 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 citation (6.08 ± 3.3) had a correlation (R: 0.672, P 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.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

The introduction of the 5-year impact factor : does it benefit statistics journals?

NARCIS (Netherlands)

van Nierop, Erjen

In this paper, we investigate the effects of the introduction of 5-year impact factors. We collect impact factor data for all disciplines available in the Journal Citation Reports. For all these categories, we give insights into the relationship between the traditional 2-year impact factor and the

Brazilian impact factor of physics journals - the third side of the coin

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

José R. Mohallem

2015-06-01

Full Text Available The lack of correlation between the Journal Impact Factors and the most cited Brazilian papers in physics is statistically demonstrated. The existence of an effective "Brazilian Impact Factor" is observed, being its values, in general, lower than the international Impact Factors. In some cases, discrepancies from the international values are huge, leading to doubts on whether it is appropriate to use this indicator to judge Brazilian scientists.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Journal Impact Factor: Do the Numerator and Denominator Need Correction?

Science.gov (United States)

Liu, Xue-Li; Gai, Shuang-Shuang; Zhou, Jing

2016-01-01

To correct the incongruence of document types between the numerator and denominator in the traditional impact factor (IF), we make a corresponding adjustment to its formula and present five corrective IFs: IFTotal/Total, IFTotal/AREL, IFAR/AR, IFAREL/AR, and IFAREL/AREL. Based on a survey of researchers in the fields of ophthalmology and mathematics, we obtained the real impact ranking of sample journals in the minds of peer experts. The correlations between various IFs and questionnaire score were analyzed to verify their journal evaluation effects. The results show that it is scientific and reasonable to use five corrective IFs for journal evaluation for both ophthalmology and mathematics. For ophthalmology, the journal evaluation effects of the five corrective IFs are superior than those of traditional IF: the corrective effect of IFAR/AR is the best, IFAREL/AR is better than IFTotal/Total, followed by IFTotal/AREL, and IFAREL/AREL. For mathematics, the journal evaluation effect of traditional IF is superior than those of the five corrective IFs: the corrective effect of IFTotal/Total is best, IFAREL/AR is better than IFTotal/AREL and IFAREL/AREL, and the corrective effect of IFAR/AR is the worst. In conclusion, not all disciplinary journal IF need correction. The results in the current paper show that to correct the IF of ophthalmologic journals may be valuable, but it seems to be meaningless for mathematic journals. PMID:26977697

A Short Review on Journal Impact Factor; Significance and Defects

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Masoud Eisa Khajelou

2015-08-01

Full Text Available Impact Factor (IF is considered as one of the most common subjects in academic environments. Individuals who would like to publish their productions and/or research results confront with various indicators, brands and labels that indicate relative importance, academic discipline and quality of journals. Diversity of the indicators induces confusion to select applicable journals and often, the authors would not be able to distinguish IF, ISI and their relations with the acceptance of the journal. Meanwhile, they have difficulties to find IF. Hence, this short paper aimed to provide useful information for authors to familiarize them with the concept of IF.​

The Use of Twitter by the Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery Journals: Twitter Activity, Impact Factor, and Alternative Metrics.

Science.gov (United States)

Hughes, Hannah; Hughes, Andrew; Murphy, Colin

2017-12-10

Aim Social media (SoMe) platforms have become leading methods of communication and dissemination of scientific information in the medical community. They allow for immediate discussion and widespread engagement around important topics. It has been hypothesized that the activity on Twitter positively correlates with highly cited articles. The purpose of this study was to analyze the prevalence and activity of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery journals on Twitter, with the hypothesis that the impact factor is positively associated with the Twitter usage. Methods The top 50 Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery journals, ranked by 2016 Impact Factor were analyzed. The Twitter profiles of each journal or affiliated society were identified. Other SoMe platforms used were also recorded. The Twitonomy software (Digonomy Pty Ltd, New South Wales, Australia) was used to analyze the Twitter profiles over a one-year period. The Twitter Klout scores were recorded for each journal to approximate the SoMe influence. The Altmetric scores (the total number of mentions via alternative metrics) were also recorded. The statistical analysis was carried out to identify correlations between journal Impact Factors, SoMe activity, Twitter Klout scores and Altmetric scores.  Results Twenty-two journals (44%) were dedicated to the Twitter profiles. Fourteen journals (28%) were associated with societies that had profiles and 14 journals (28%) had no Twitter presence. The mean Impact Factor overall was 2.16 +/- 0.14 (range, 1.07-5.16). The journals with dedicated Twitter profiles had higher Impact Factors than those without (mean 2.41 vs. 1.61; P=0.005). A greater number of Twitter followers were associated with higher Impact Factors (R2 0.317, P=0.03). The journals with higher Twitter Klout scores had higher Impact Factors (R2 0.357, P=0.016). The Altmetric score was positively associated with an Impact Factor (R2 0.310, P=0.015). The journals with higher numbers of retweets (virtual citations in

[Comparative analysis of impact factor and h-index for pharmacology journals].

Science.gov (United States)

Bador, Pascal; Lafouge, Thierry

2010-01-01

Using the strictly same parameters (identical two publication years (2004-2005) and identical one-year citation window (2006)), impact factor (IF) 2006 was compared with h-index 2006 for one sample of "pharmacology and pharmacy" journals computed from the ISI Web of Science. For this sample, the IF and the h-index rankings of the journals are very different. The correlation coefficient between the IF and the h-index is low for "pharmacology and pharmacy" journals. The IF and h-index can be completely complementary when evaluating journals of the same scientific discipline. 2010 Société Française de Pharmacologie et de Thérapeutique.

The effect of social media (#SoMe) on journal impact factor and parental awareness in paediatric urology.

Science.gov (United States)

O'Kelly, F; Nason, G J; Manecksha, R P; Cascio, S; Quinn, F J; Leonard, M; Koyle, M A; Farhat, W; Leveridge, M J

2017-10-01

Social media (SoMe) comprises a number of internet-based applications that have the capability to disseminate multimodal media and allow for unprecedented inter-user connectivity. The role of Twitter has been studied in conferences and education; moreover, there is increasing evidence that patients are more likely to use social media for their own health education. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of social media platforms on the impact factor of both urological and paediatric journals that publish on paediatric urology, and to assess parental awareness of social media in paediatric urology. A filtered Journal of Citation Reports (JCR) search was performed for the period 2012-16 for journals that published articles on paediatric urology. Journals were ranked according to impact factor, and each individual journal website was accessed to assess for the presence of social media. Parents in paediatric urology clinics and non-paediatric urology patients also filled out a questionnaire to assess for awareness and attitudes to social media. All statistical analysis was performed using Prism 6 software (Prism 6, GraphPad Software, California, USA). Overall, there were 50 urological journals and 39 paediatric journals with a mean impact factor of 2.303 and 1.766, respectively. There was an overall average increase in impact factor across all urological journals between 2012 and 16. The presence of a Twitter feed was statistically significant for a rise in impact factor over the 4 years (P = 0.017). The cohort of parents was statistically more likely to have completed post-secondary education, to have and access to a social media profile, use it for health education, and use it to access journal/physician/hospital social media accounts. This study examined, for the first time, the role of social media in paediatric urology, and demonstrated that SoMe use is associated with a positive influence in impact factor, but also a parental appetite for it

Investigating the Link between self-citation and authors’ co-incidence with journal impact factors in Iran: Case study of Economic Journals indexed in Islamic Science Citation Database

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Hashem Attapour

2010-03-01

Full Text Available   The present paper examines the links between self-citation and authors’ co-incidence with impact factors of economic journals indexed in ISC. It is essentially a scientometric research employing citation analysis and literature survey. Data was collected by querying ISC and leafing through the journals studied. Self-citation, authors’ co-incidence and impact factor of the journal studied formed the variables. Correlation analysis indicated that there is a significance between authors’ self-citations and co-incidence with impact factor of the journals studied. Significance was also found between authors’ co-incidence and self-citation of the journals studied.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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

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

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Daniel R. Shanahan

2016-03-01

Full Text Available 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 r2 = 0.26, range 0.18–1.0. Conclusion

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Impact of "JOBM": ISI Impact Factor Places the "Journal of Organizational Behavior Management" Third in Applied Psychology

Science.gov (United States)

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…

An Analysis of Peer-Reviewed Scores and Impact Factors with Different Citation Time Windows: A Case Study of 28 Ophthalmologic Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Liu, Xue-Li; Gai, Shuang-Shuang; Zhang, Shi-Le; Wang, Pu

2015-01-01

An important attribute of the traditional impact factor was the controversial 2-year citation window. So far, several scholars have proposed using different citation time windows for evaluating journals. However, there is no confirmation whether a longer citation time window would be better. How did the journal evaluation effects of 3IF, 4IF, and 6IF comparing with 2IF and 5IF? In order to understand these questions, we made a comparative study of impact factors with different citation time windows with the peer-reviewed scores of ophthalmologic journals indexed by Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) database. The peer-reviewed scores of 28 ophthalmologic journals were obtained through a self-designed survey questionnaire. Impact factors with different citation time windows (including 2IF, 3IF, 4IF, 5IF, and 6IF) of 28 ophthalmologic journals were computed and compared in accordance with each impact factor's definition and formula, using the citation analysis function of the Web of Science (WoS) database. An analysis of the correlation between impact factors with different citation time windows and peer-reviewed scores was carried out. Although impact factor values with different citation time windows were different, there was a high level of correlation between them when it came to evaluating journals. In the current study, for ophthalmologic journals' impact factors with different time windows in 2013, 3IF and 4IF seemed the ideal ranges for comparison, when assessed in relation to peer-reviewed scores. In addition, the 3-year and 4-year windows were quite consistent with the cited peak age of documents published by ophthalmologic journals. Our study is based on ophthalmology journals and we only analyze the impact factors with different citation time window in 2013, so it has yet to be ascertained whether other disciplines (especially those with a later cited peak) or other years would follow the same or similar patterns. We designed the survey questionnaire

Relationship between category size and journals' impact factor: implications for emergency medicine journals and researchers.

Science.gov (United States)

Miró, Òscar; Brown, Anthony F T; Graham, Colin A; Ducharme, James; Martin-Sanchez, Francisco J; Cone, David C

2015-10-01

We assessed the relationship between the size of the 39 Journal Citation Reports (JCR) medical categories and impact factor (IF) of journals in these categories, and the implications that it might have for emergency medicine (EM) journals. Using the 2010 JCR database, we calculated the mean IF, 5-year IF (5y-IF), Eigenfactor (EF), and Article Influence (AI) scores including all journals for each category. We also calculated a 'weighted IF' for all journals by dividing each journal IF by the mean IF of its category. We ranked EM journals according to IF and 'weighted IF' into all the journals included in the 39 categories. We assessed the relationship between category size and bibliometric scores by linear regression. Category size varied from 252 journals (Pharmacology and Pharmacy) to 14 (Primary Healthcare), EM category occupying the 36th position (23 journals). The mean IF of EM category ranked in 34th position, 5-yIF in 32nd, EF in 34th, and AI in 34th position. Category size had a direct and significant association with mean IF, 5y-IF, and AI but not with mean EF. When the EM journals were ranked among all the journals according to their IF, only two (9%) were placed into the first quartile and raised up to eight (35%) when 'weighted IF' was considered. There is a negative relationship between JCR size category and IF achieved by the journals. This places EM journals at a clear disadvantage because they represent one of the smallest clinical medical research disciplines.

Impactitis: The impact factor myth syndrome

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Elsaie Mohamed

2009-01-01

Full Text Available Background : In the early 1960s, Eugene Garfield and Irving Sher created the journal impact factor to help select journals for the Science Citation Index (SCI. Today it has become a widespread subject of controversy even for Garfield, the man who created it who is quoted saying " Impact Factor is not a perfect tool to measure the quality of articles but there is nothing better and it has the advantage of already being in existence and is, therefore, a good technique for scientific evaluation". The use of the term "impact factor" has gradually evolved, especially in Europe, to include both journal and author impact. This ambiguity often causes problems. It is one thing to use impact factors to compare journals and quite another to use them to compare authors. Journal impact factors generally involve relatively large populations of articles and citations. Individual authors, on average, produce much smaller numbers of articles. Objectives: Impact factor, an index based on the frequency with which a journal′s articles are cited in scientific publications, is a putative marker of journal quality. However, empiric studies on impact factor′s validity as an indicator of quality are lacking. The authors try to evaluate and highlight the validity of Impact Factors and its significance as a tool of assessment for scientific publications. Methods: Analysis of the several reports in literature and from their own point of view. Conclusion: A journal′s impact factor is based on 2 elements: the numerator, which is the number of citations in the current year to any items published in a journal in the previous 2 years, and the denominator, which is the number of substantive articles (source items published in the same 2 years. The impact factor could just as easily be based on the previous year′s articles alone, which would give an even greater weight to rapidly changing fields.

Not So Fast: Inflation in Impact Factors Contributes to Apparent Improvements in Journal Quality

Science.gov (United States)

Neff, Bryan D.; Olden, Julian D.

2010-01-01

The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) impact factor has become an important standard for assessing journal quality. Here we propose that impact factors may be subject to inflation analogous to changes in monetary prices in economics. The possibility of inflation came to light as a result of the observation that papers published today tend…

An assessment of South Africa's research journals: Impact factors, Eigenfactors and structure of editorial boards

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Androniki E.M. Pouris

2015-03-01

Full Text Available Scientific journals play an important role in academic information exchange and their assessment is of interest to science authorities, editors and researchers. The assessment of journals is of particular interest to South African authorities as the country's universities are partially funded according to the number of publications they produce in accredited journals, such as the Thomson Reuters indexed journals. Scientific publishing in South Africa has experienced a revolution during the last 10 years. Our objective here is to report the performance of the country's journals during 2009 and 2010 according to a number of metrics (i.e. impact factors, Eigenfactors and the international character of editorial boards; to identify and compare the impact of the South African journals that have been recently added to the Thomson Reuters' Journal Citation Reports; and to elaborate on issues related to science policy.

Mixing journal, article, and author citations, and other pitfalls in the bibliographic impact factor

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Porta Miquel

2003-01-01

Full Text Available News of the death of biomedical journals seem premature. Revamped traditional scientific journals remain highly valued sources and vehicles of information, critical debate, and knowledge. Some analyses seem to place a disproportionate emphasis on technological and formal issues, as compared to the importance ascribed to matters of power. Not all journals must necessarily have a large circulation. There are many examples of efficient, high-quality journals with a great impact on relatively small audiences for whom the journal is thought-provoking, useful, and pleasant to read. How can we achieve a better understanding of an article?s spectrum of impacts? A certain mixing of three distinct entities (journals, articles, and authors has often pervaded judgments. Data used by the Institute for Scientific Information present weaknesses in their accuracy. The two-year limit for citations to count towards the bibliographic impact factor favors "fast-moving", "basic" biomedical disciplines and is less appropriate for public health studies. Increasing attention is given to the specific number of citations received by each individual article. It is possible to make progress towards more valid, accurate, fair, and relevant assessments.

Normalized impact factor (NIF): an adjusted method for calculating the citation rate of biomedical journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Owlia, P; Vasei, M; Goliaei, B; Nassiri, I

2011-04-01

The interests in journal impact factor (JIF) in scientific communities have grown over the last decades. The JIFs are used to evaluate journals quality and the papers published therein. JIF is a discipline specific measure and the comparison between the JIF dedicated to different disciplines is inadequate, unless a normalization process is performed. In this study, normalized impact factor (NIF) was introduced as a relatively simple method enabling the JIFs to be used when evaluating the quality of journals and research works in different disciplines. The NIF index was established based on the multiplication of JIF by a constant factor. The constants were calculated for all 54 disciplines of biomedical field during 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 years. Also, ranking of 393 journals in different biomedical disciplines according to the NIF and JIF were compared to illustrate how the NIF index can be used for the evaluation of publications in different disciplines. The findings prove that the use of the NIF enhances the equality in assessing the quality of research works produced by researchers who work in different disciplines. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Correlation between Self-Citation and Impact Factor in Iranian English Medical Journals in WoS and ISC: A Comparative Approach.

Science.gov (United States)

Ghazi Mirsaeid, Seyed Javad; Motamedi, Nadia; Ramezan Ghorbani, Nahid

2015-09-01

In this study, the impact of self-citation (Journal and Author) on impact factor of Iranian English Medical journals in two international citation databases, Web of Science (WoS) and Islamic world science citation center (ISC), were compared by citation analysis. Twelve journals in WoS and 26 journals in ISC databases indexed between the years (2006-2009) were selected and compared. For comparison of self-citation rate in two databases, we used Wilcoxon and Mann-whitney tests. We used Pearson test for correlation of self-citation and IF in WoS, and the Spearman's correlation coefficient for the ISC database. Covariance analysis was used for comparison of two correlation tests. P. value was 0.05 in all of tests. There was no significant difference between self-citation rates in two databases (P>0.05). Findings also showed no significant difference between the correlation of Journal self-citation and impact factor in two databases (P=0.526) however, there was significant difference between the author's self-citation and impact factor in these databases (Pcitation in the Impact Factor of WoS was higher than the ISC.

The level of non-citation of articles within a journal as a measure of quality: a comparison to the impact factor

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Weale Andy R

2004-05-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background Current methods of measuring the quality of journals assume that citations of articles within journals are normally distributed. Furthermore using journal impact factors to measure the quality of individual articles is flawed if citations are not uniformly spread between articles. The aim of this study was to assess the distribution of citations to articles and use the level of non-citation of articles within a journal as a measure of quality. This ranking method is compared with the impact factor, as calculated by ISI®. Methods Total citations gained by October 2003, for every original article and review published in current immunology (13125 articles; 105 journals and surgical (17083 articles; 120 journals fields during 2001 were collected using ISI® Web of Science. Results The distribution of citation of articles within an individual journal is mainly non-parametric throughout the literature. One sixth (16.7%; IQR 13.6–19.2 of articles in a journal accrue half the total number of citations to that journal. There was a broader distribution of citation to articles in higher impact journals and in the field of immunology compared to surgery. 23.7% (IQR 14.6–42.4 of articles had not yet been cited. Levels of non-citation varied between journals and subject fields. There was a significant negative correlation between the proportion of articles never cited and a journal's impact factor for both immunology (rho = -0.854 and surgery journals (rho = -0.924. Conclusion Ranking journals by impact factor and non-citation produces similar results. Using a non-citation rate is advantageous as it creates a clear distinction between how citation analysis is used to determine the quality of a journal (low level of non-citation and an individual article (citation counting. Non-citation levels should therefore be made available for all journals.

Impact factor (if) of hospitality, leisure, sports & tourism journals: current trends, overall ranking and temporal stability over a four year period

OpenAIRE

Sans-Rosell, Nuria; Reverter Masià, Joaquín; Hernández González, Vicenç

2013-01-01

A journal’s “impact factor” (IF) is the bibliometric index that reflects the frequency with which an ‘‘average article’’ from a scientific journal has been cited in subsequent publications.The purpose of the present study is to examine the current impact factor of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports & Tourism journals, their overall ranking and temporal stability over a four year period. For this reason, we have included the impact factor of the scientific journals classifiedin the “Hospitality,...

Species distribution models and impact factor growth in environmental journals: methodological fashion or the attraction of global change science.

Science.gov (United States)

Brotons, Lluís

2014-01-01

In this work, I evaluate the impact of species distribution models (SDMs) on the current status of environmental and ecological journals by asking the question to which degree development of SDMs in the literature is related to recent changes in the impact factors of ecological journals. The hypothesis evaluated states that research fronts are likely to attract research attention and potentially drive citation patterns, with journals concentrating papers related to the research front receiving more attention and benefiting from faster increases in their impact on the ecological literature. My results indicate a positive relationship between the number of SDM related articles published in a journal and its impact factor (IF) growth during the period 2000-09. However, the percentage of SDM related papers in a journal was strongly and positively associated with the percentage of papers on climate change and statistical issues. The results support the hypothesis that global change science has been critical in the development of SDMs and that interest in climate change research in particular, rather than the usage of SDM per se, appears as an important factor behind journal IF increases in ecology and environmental sciences. Finally, our results on SDM application in global change science support the view that scientific interest rather than methodological fashion appears to be the major driver of research attraction in the scientific literature.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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…

Comparison of the time-to-indexing in PubMed between biomedical journals according to impact factor, discipline, and focus.

Science.gov (United States)

Irwin, Adriane N; Rackham, Daniel

Practicing evidence-based medicine requires health care professionals to efficiently retrieve relevant and current literature. The purpose of this study was to compare the time interval between PubMed entry and indexing with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) between biomedical journals with varying impact factors, focus areas, and health care discipline representation. This was a cross-sectional study of articles entered into PubMed database between January 1 and December 31, 2012. The primary endpoint was the number of days between PubMed entry and indexing with MeSH terms. A total of 7906 articles were reviewed across 18 journals. In the first comparison, the time-to-indexing was 177 ± 100 days, 111 ± 69 days, and 23 ± 40 days for articles published in journals with impact factors of 2.0-2.5, 4.5-6.5, and >25, respectively (P ≤ 0.001). In the second comparison, the time-to-indexing was 111 ± 69 days for general medicine versus 170 ± 74 days for specialty journals (P ≤ 0.001). In the third comparison, the overall time-to-indexing was 177 ± 100 days, 234 ± 107 days, and 163 ± 58 days for medicine, nursing, and pharmacy journals, respectively (P ≤ 0.001). Study results identified a significant delay between entry of articles into the PubMed database and time-to-indexing with MeSH terms across journals of varying impact factor, discipline, and focus. Results suggest that there may be factors that influence the priority by which articles are indexed with MeSH terms. Future research should focus on determining those journal characteristics and any impact of this delay on clinical practice. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Influence of Article Type on the Impact Factor of Dermatology Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Rodríguez-Lago, L; Molina-Leyva, A; Pereiro-Ferreirós, M; García-Doval, I

2018-06-01

For scientific journals, achieving a high impact factor (IF) has become a goal in its own right. Our aim was to describe the influence of article type on the IF of dermatology journals. We used the Scopus database to calculate an IF for Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas and the major dermatology journals, excluding articles without abstracts, letters to the editor, and conference proceedings. Included articles were classified into 4 categories: case reports, original articles, narrative reviews, and other. We also calculated the mean IF for each article type. We then compared our results with IFs published by the Institute for Scientific Information. The proportion of each type of article differed between journals. Original articles carried the greatest weight in the major journals (BJD, 76.8%; Contact, 81.1%; JAAD, 63.4%; JAMA Dermatol, 63.7%.) but not in Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas, where only 31.7% were original research articles. A higher IF was associated with the publication of reviews and original articles; a lower IF was associated with the publication of case reports and other article types. Publishing case reports, which have lower citation rates, leads to a lower IF. Publishing reviews and original articles will lead to a higher IF. Journals that seek a higher IF should probably publish more reviews and original articles and fewer case reports. Editorial boards should seek a balance between the interests of their clinician readers and the journal's need for a higher IF. Copyright © 2018 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

De validiteit van de impactfactor: Een experiment. / On the validity of the impact factor of scientific journals: An experiment.

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Hoogstraten, J.; Wijck, J.

1998-01-01

Studied the impact factor as an indicator of the quality of journal articles. Human subjects: 28 normal Dutch adults (members of the Faculty of Psychology at the University of Amsterdam). Ss judged the quality of 6 articles selected from 3 well-known social psychological journals (the Journal of

The Impact Factor of Radiological Journals: Associations with Journal Content and Other Characteristics Over a Recent 12-Year Period.

Science.gov (United States)

Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Ayoola, Abimbola

2016-06-01

The aim of this study was to evaluate the trends in the impact factor (IF) of radiological journals over a recent 12-year period, including associations between IF and journal topic. Journal Citation Reports (JCR) was used to identify all biomedical journals and all radiological journals (assigned a JCR category of "Radiology, Nuclear Medicine, & Medical Imaging"), along with journal IF, in 2003 and 2014. Radiological journals were manually classified by topic. Trends in median IF (mIF) were assessed. The number of radiological journals increased from 83 (2003) to 125 (2014) (all biomedical journals: 5907 to 8718, respectively). mIF of radiological journals increased from 1.42 (2003) to 1.75 (2014) (all biomedical journals: 0.93 to 1.46, respectively). The most common topic among new radiological journals was general (nonspecialized) radiology (8). Five new radiological journals in 2014 were in topics (cancer imaging and molecular imaging) having no journals in 2003. mIF of general radiological journals was 1.49. Topics having highest mIF were cardiac imaging (2.94), optics (2.86), molecular imaging (2.77), radiation oncology (2.60), and neuroradiology (2.25). Topics with lowest mIF were ultrasound (1.19) and interventional radiology (1.44). Topics with the largest increase in mIF were cardiac imaging (from 1.17 to 2.94) and neuroradiology (from 1.07 to 2.25). Radiological journals exhibited higher mIF than biomedical journals overall. Among radiological journals, subspecialty journals had highest mIF. While a considerable number of new radiological journals since 2003 were general radiology journals having relatively low IF, there were also new journal topics representing emerging areas of subspecialized radiological research. Copyright © 2016 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A Survey on Characteristics of Core Latin Journals in Scientific Output of Faculty Members of Tehran University in Accordance to ISI Citations and JCR Impact Factor During 1990-2009

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Fatemeh Jafari

2010-12-01

Full Text Available The present study intends to investigate characteristics of core Latin journals in scientific output of faculty members of Tehran University (Faculties of Humanities, Psychology and Education, Social Science and Art indexed in A&HCI, SSCI (Thomson Reuters according to ISI citations and, JCR impact factor. 5434 citations to 194 articles were used as sample. Citation analysis was employed. Core journals were established according to Bradford law. Research findings reveal that out of 5434 citations, 3230 (59/44% citations belong to periodicals. Also due to interdisciplinary differences, in 50 % majors, periodicals were cited more than other information sources. Findings also indicate that there are similarities between the core journals and JCR journals. Comparison of impact factor average of core journals with impact factor average of JCR journals shows that average impact factor of core journals exceeds impact factor average of JCR journals in related fields

Citation analysis of the Brazilian tourism journals: subsidies for the es-timation of impact factors

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Glauber Eduardo de Oliveira Santos

2017-01-01

Full Text Available This paper presents the analysis of all references made by articles published at the four major Brazilian tourism journals. A total of 28,767 references in the 1,254 articles published since the first volume of each journal until the end of 2014. References were analyzed with respect to their type (journal, book, thesis, conference paper and others, place of publishing (Brazil or other countries and authorship. For the references of scientific articles, the names of these specific vehicles were identified. The results indicate the most cited authors, books, articles and journals. Impact factors of journals and the h-index of Hirsch (2005 of authors were also estimated. Moreover, techniques of social network analysis were applied to the representation of the relationships between authors and journals, besides estimating complex centrality indexes for these agents. The results also indicate some tendencies of change in the actual scenario arising from the strengthening of new authors and journals.

Impact of the Journal of Child Neurology: 2002 data.

Science.gov (United States)

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.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

The impactful of a good impact factor

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Paloma Celada

2017-09-01

Full Text Available This paper ironically analyzes about the impact factor, a quality index that obsesses scientific journals and the authors who risk to in them. It also criticizes why this factor is unfair in assessing the merits of scientific researchs and what it means for researchers and some publishers. Using a humorous touch but also under a very serious scientific point of view, the validity of the impact factor is questioned to define the quality and credibility of a scientific journal.

Bibliometrics of systematic reviews: analysis of citation rates and journal impact factors

Science.gov (United States)

2013-01-01

Background Systematic reviews are important for informing clinical practice and health policy. The aim of this study was to examine the bibliometrics of systematic reviews and to determine the amount of variance in citations predicted by the journal impact factor (JIF) alone and combined with several other characteristics. Methods We conducted a bibliometric analysis of 1,261 systematic reviews published in 2008 and the citations to them in the Scopus database from 2008 to June 2012. Potential predictors of the citation impact of the reviews were examined using descriptive, univariate and multiple regression analysis. Results The mean number of citations per review over four years was 26.5 (SD ±29.9) or 6.6 citations per review per year. The mean JIF of the journals in which the reviews were published was 4.3 (SD ±4.2). We found that 17% of the reviews accounted for 50% of the total citations and 1.6% of the reviews were not cited. The number of authors was correlated with the number of citations (r = 0.215, P reviews published in the top quartile of JIFs (≥ 5.16) received citations in the bottom quartile (eight or fewer), whereas 9% of reviews published in the lowest JIF quartile (≤ 2.06) received citations in the top quartile (34 or more). Six percent of reviews in journals with no JIF were also in the first quartile of citations. Conclusions The JIF predicted over half of the variation in citations to the systematic reviews. However, the distribution of citations was markedly skewed. Some reviews in journals with low JIFs were well-cited and others in higher JIF journals received relatively few citations; hence the JIF did not accurately represent the number of citations to individual systematic reviews. PMID:24028376

The impact factor of rheumatology journals : an analysis of 2008 and the recent 10 years

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Chen, Min; Zhao, Ming-Hui; Kallenberg, Cees G. M.

2011-01-01

Despite various weaknesses, the impact factor (IF) is still used as an important indictor for scientific quality in specific subject categories. In the current study, the IFs of rheumatology journals over the past 10 years were serially analyzed and compared with that from other fields. For the past

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

Science.gov (United States)

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 = 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

Milestones and Impact Factors

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Grandjean Philippe

2010-07-01

Full Text Available Abstract Environmental Health has just received its first Impact Factor by Thomson ISI. At a level of 2.48, this achievement is quite satisfactory and places Environmental Health in the top 25% of environmental science journals. When the journal was launched in 2002, it was still unclear whether the Open Access publishing model could be made into a viable commercial enterprise within the biomedical field. During the past eight years, Open Access journals have become widely available, although still covering only about 15% of journal titles. Major funding agencies and institutions, including prominent US universities, now require that researchers publish in Open Access journals. Because of the profound role of scientific journals for the sharing of results and communication between researchers, the advent of Open Access may be of as much significance as the transition from handwriting to printing via moveable type. As Environmental Health is an electronic Open Access journal, the numbers of downloads at the journal website can be retrieved. The top-20 list of articles most frequently accessed shows that all of them have been downloaded over 10,000 times. Back in 2002, the first article published was accessed only 49 times during the following month. A year later, the server had over 1,000 downloads per month, and now the total number of monthly downloads approaches 50,000. These statistics complement the Impact Factor and confirm the viability of Open Access in our field of research. The advent of digital media and its decentralized mode of distribution - the internet - have dramatically changed the control and financing of scientific information dissemination, while facilitating peer review, accelerating editorial handling, and supporting much needed transparency. Both the meaning and means of "having an impact" are therefore changing, as will the degree and way in which scientific journals remain "factors" in that impact.

Impact factor and other indices to assess science, scientists and scientific journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Satyanarayana, K

2010-01-01

This paper traces the evolution of measures and parameters for the evaluation of science and scientific journals from the first attempts during the early part of the last century to the development of the most popular, current and widely used metrics viz., citations, impact factor (IF) etc. The identification of measures of evaluation in science and scientific reporting paralled the post-war increase in funding in the United States of America. Biomedical and medical sciences continue to garner a major share, estimated to be almost two-thirds of total research and development funding of over US$ 350 billion. There has been a concomitant growth in the publications in learned journals. About 1.4 million papers are published every year in an estimated 20,000 journals. In India there are an estimated 100 journals in medical sciences. With a steady increase of about 10% every year, the competition for grants, awards, rewards etc., is fierce. This unrelenting increase in number of scientists and the resultant competition, the limitation of peer review was felt. A search was on for new quantifiable measures for informed decision making for funding, awards, rewards, etc. Now virtually all major decisions all over the world are based on some data linked to publications and/or citations. The concept of citations as tool for 'evaluating' science was first proposed by Eugene Garfield in 1955. The availability of Science Citation Index (SCI), Journal Citation Reports (JCR), Web of Science etc. and the relative ease with which they could be used (and abused) has spawned an entirely new area bibliometrics/scientometrics. As only a limited number of journals could be included in the Thomson Reuters (TR) databases (currently numbering about 10500), analyses based on such a limited dataset (also selected in a non-transparent way by the TR) has been widely and severely criticized by both the developed and developing countries. Yet, studies have shown that citation-based data and

Citation trend and suggestions for improvement of impact factor of Journal of Korean Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Kim, Seong Hwan; Hwang, Seong Su; Ahn, Myeong Im; Jeong, So Na

2006-01-01

To analyze the recent citation trend and to find a way to improve impact factor (IF) of the Journal of Korean Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (JKSTRO) by analysis of Korean Medical Citation index (KoMCI) citation data of JKSTRO and comparison with that of mean citation data of all journals enlisted on KoMCI (KoMCI journals) during 2000-2005. All citation data of entire journals enlisted on KoMCI and JKSTRO from 2000 to 2005 were obtained from KoMCI. The trend of total and annual number of published articles and reference citations, total citations and self-citations per paper, IF and impact factor excluding self-citations (ZIF) were described and compared on both KoMCI journals an JKSTRO. Annual number of published articles was decreased for 6 years on both KoMCI journals and JKSTRO (32% and 38% reduction rate). The number of Korean journal references per article is 1.6 papers of JKSTRO comparing to 2.0 papers on KoMCI journals. The percentage of Korean references/total references increased from 5.0% in 2000 to 7.7% in 2005 on JKSTRO and from 8.5% in 2000 to 10.1% on KoMCI journals. The number of total citations received/paper on JKSTRO (average 1.333) is smaller than that of KoMCI journals (average 1.694), there was an increased rate of 67% in 2005 comparing to 2000. The percentage of self-citations/total citations (average 72%) on JKSTRO is slightly higher than that of KoMCI journals (average 61%)/ IF of JKSTRO was gradually improved and 0.144, 0.125, 0.088, 0.107, 0.187 and 0.203 in 2000-2005 respectively. However, ZIF of JKSTRO is steadily decreased from 0.038 in 2000 to 0.013 in 2005 except 0.044 in 2004. IF of JKSTRO was slightly improved but had some innate problem of smaller number of citations received . To make JKSTRO as a highly cited journal, the awareness of academic status of JKSTRO and active participation of every member of JKSTRO including encouraging self-citations of papers published recent 2 years and submission of English written papers, and

Bibliometric analysis of anaesthesia journal editorial board members: correlation between journal impact factor and the median h-index of its board members.

Science.gov (United States)

Pagel, P S; Hudetz, J A

2011-09-01

h-index is useful for quantifying scholarly activity in medicine, but this statistic has not been extensively applied as a measure of productivity in anaesthesia. We conducted a bibliometric analysis of h-index in editorial board members and tested the hypothesis that editorial board members of anaesthesia journals with higher impact factors (IFs) have higher h-indices. Ten of 19 journals with 2009 IF>1 were randomly chosen from Journal Citation Reports(®). Board members were identified using each journal's website. Publications, citations, citations per publication, and h-index for each member were obtained using Scopus(®). Four hundred and twenty-three individuals filled 481 anaesthesia editorial board positions. The median h-index of all editorial board members was 14. Board members published 75 papers (median) with 1006 citations and 13 citations per publication. Members serving on journals with IF greater than median had significantly (Pcitations, and citations per publication than those at journals with IF less than median. A significant correlation between the median h-index of a journal's editorial board members and its IF (h-index=3.01×IF+6.85; r( 2)=0.452; P=0.033) was observed for the 10 journals examined. Board members of subspeciality-specific journals had bibliometric indices that were less than those at general journals. The h-index was greater in individuals serving more than one journal. European editorial board members had higher h-index values than their American colleagues. The results suggest that editorial board members of anaesthesia journals with higher IFs have higher h-indices.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Associating co-authorship patterns with publications in high-impact journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Bales, Michael E; Dine, Daniel C; Merrill, Jacqueline A; Johnson, Stephen B; Bakken, Suzanne; Weng, Chunhua

2014-12-01

To develop a method for investigating co-authorship patterns and author team characteristics associated with the publications in high-impact journals through the integration of public MEDLINE data and institutional scientific profile data. For all current researchers at Columbia University Medical Center, we extracted their publications from MEDLINE authored between years 2007 and 2011 and associated journal impact factors, along with author academic ranks and departmental affiliations obtained from Columbia University Scientific Profiles (CUSP). Chi-square tests were performed on co-authorship patterns, with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, to identify team composition characteristics associated with publication impact factors. We also developed co-authorship networks for the 25 most prolific departments between years 2002 and 2011 and counted the internal and external authors, inter-connectivity, and centrality of each department. Papers with at least one author from a basic science department are significantly more likely to appear in high-impact journals than papers authored by those from clinical departments alone. Inclusion of at least one professor on the author list is strongly associated with publication in high-impact journals, as is inclusion of at least one research scientist. Departmental and disciplinary differences in the ratios of within- to outside-department collaboration and overall network cohesion are also observed. Enrichment of co-authorship patterns with author scientific profiles helps uncover associations between author team characteristics and appearance in high-impact journals. These results may offer implications for mentoring junior biomedical researchers to publish on high-impact journals, as well as for evaluating academic progress across disciplines in modern academic medical centers. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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

Exploring the Hjif-Index, an Analogue to the H-Like Index for Journal Impact Factors

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

William Cabos

2018-04-01

Full Text Available We used the Journal Impact Factor (JIF to develop the hjif-index, calculated in a similar way to h-like indices. To this end, we mapped the JIFs of one JCR group to natural numbers, and evaluated the degree of correspondence between the interval from zero to the highest JIF in the group and a set of natural numbers. Next, we plotted the straight line y = x to obtain the group’s hjif-index as the JIF corresponding to the journal immediately above the straight line. We call the set of journals above the straight line the hjif-core. We calculated hjif-indices corresponding to the 2-year JIF (hjif2-index and 5-year JIF (hjif5-index windows for all 176 JCR groups listed in the 2014 Science edition. We also studied derived indicators such as the distribution of journals in JCR groups according to their hjif-indices, the distribution of journals and JIFs in the hjif-core, and other variables and indicators. We found that the hjif2- and hjif5-index behaved in a similar way, and that in general their distribution showed a peak followed by a relatively long tail. The hjif-index can be used as a tool to rank journals in a manner that better reflects the variable number of journals within a given JCR group and in each group’s hjif-core as an alternative to the more arbitrary JCR-based percentile ranking.

The correlations between certain features of the journal Neotropical Ichthyology and its impact factor: a comparative analysis at the thematic and national levels

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Sabrina Menezes

Full Text Available The present article analyzes the relationship between characteristics of the journal Neotropical Ichthyology and its impact factor (IF between 2006 and 2011 using bibliometric descriptive quantitative methods. To perform this analysis, two samples of journals included in Journal Citation Reports (JCR were studied. One sample was composed of journals classified within the subject of zoology, and the other contained journals from different areas published in Brazil. The instrument used for data collection was a database created in Microsoft Excel 2007 and the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS version 18. The results show that despite its short history, Neotropical Ichthyologyhas exhibited a distinctive impact, as manifested in a significant progression in the IF of this journal in the field of zoology during the investigated period.

Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact.

Science.gov (United States)

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

Coercive Journal Self Citations, Impact Factor, Journal Influence and Article Influence

NARCIS (Netherlands)

C-L. Chang (Chia-Lin); M.J. McAleer (Michael)

2013-01-01

textabstractThis paper examines the issue of coercive journal self citations and the practical usefulness of two recent journal performance metrics, namely the Eigenfactor score, which may be interpreted as measuring “Journal Influence”, and the Article Influence score, using the Thomson Reuters ISI

Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge Management: Site Map. Journal Home > About the Journal > Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge Management: Site Map. Log in or Register to get access to full text downloads.

The evolution of academic performance in emergency medicine journals: viewpoint from 2000 to 2009 journal citation reports.

Science.gov (United States)

Lee, Ching-Hsing; Shih, Chia-Pang; Chang, Yu-Che; Chaou, Chung-Hsien

2011-08-01

Emergency medicine (EM) is a young but rapidly growing field. An evaluation of academic performance and the growing impact of EM journals would help to elucidate the increase in the number of EM scientific studies. The authors used the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) database to investigate the scientific achievements of EM journals in the past 10 years. This was a literature review study. All data were collected from the JCR database. Journals listed in the EM category from 2000 to 2009 were included. Eleven categories that were considered most closely related to EM by a consensus of the authors were chosen for comparison, including cardiac and cardiovascular systems, clinical neurology, critical care medicine, gastroenterology and hepatology, infectious diseases, general and internal medicine, pediatrics, respiratory system, surgery, toxicology, and urology and nephrology. Data on journals in the EM category were collected, including journal title, language, journal country or territory, impact factor for each year, total number of EM journals for each year, and the EM category aggregate impact factor (available from 2003 to 2009). The variables in the comparison group included the number of journals in each of the 11 clinical medicine categories from 2000 to 2009 and the aggregate impact factors for 2003 to 2009. The category aggregate impact factor and journal impact factor were adopted as representative of category and journal academic performance. Linear regression was used to assess the trend of aggregate impact factor and journal impact factor. The slope (β) of the linear regression was used to represent the evolution of performance. The relationship between the 2000 EM journal impact factor and the impact factor trend of EM journals between 2000 and 2009 was measured by Pearson correlation coefficient to evaluate the evolution difference between journals with different initial impact factors. In 2000, all 12 EM journals were published in the United States

Impact factor of medical education journals and recently developed indices: Can any of them support academic promotion criteria?

Science.gov (United States)

Azer, S A; Holen, A; Wilson, I; Skokauskas, N

2016-01-01

Journal Impact Factor (JIF) has been used in assessing scientific journals. Other indices, h- and g-indices and Article Influence Score (AIS), have been developed to overcome some limitations of JIF. The aims of this study were, first, to critically assess the use of JIF and other parameters related to medical education research, and second, to discuss the capacity of these indices in assessing research productivity as well as their utility in academic promotion. The JIF of 16 medical education journals from 2000 to 2011 was examined together with the research evidence about JIF in assessing research outcomes of medical educators. The findings were discussed in light of the nonnumerical criteria often used in academic promotion. In conclusion, JIF was not designed for assessing individual or group research performance, and it seems unsuitable for such purposes. Although the g- and h-indices have demonstrated promising outcomes, further developments are needed for their use as academic promotion criteria. For top academic positions, additional criteria could include leadership, evidence of international impact, and contributions to the advancement of knowledge with regard to medical education.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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,…

Impact factor and its role in academic promotion

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Richard Russell

2009-07-01

Full Text Available Richard Russell,1 Dave Singh21Wrexham Park Hospital, Berkshire, UK; 2Northwest Lung Research Centre, South Manchester University Hospitals Trust, Manchester, UKThis statement was adopted unanimously at the May 17, 2009 meeting of the International Respiratory Journal Editors Roundtable.In our collective experience as editors of international peer-reviewed journals, we propose that the impact factor calculated for individual journals should not be used as a basis for evaluating the significance of an individual scientist’s past performance or scientific potential. There are several reasons not to equate the impact factor of a journal in which the scientist publishes with the quality of the scientist’s research.

Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge Management: Advanced Search. Journal Home > Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge Management: Advanced Search. Log in or Register to get access to full text downloads.

Osteopathic emergency medicine programs infrequently publish in high-impact emergency medicine journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Baskin, Sean M; Lin, Christina; Carlson, Jestin N

2014-11-01

Both the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) require core faculty to engage in scholarly work, including publication in peer-reviewed journals. With the ACGME/AOA merger, we sought to evaluate the frequency of publication in high-impact peer-reviewed EM journals from authors affiliated with osteopathic emergency medicine (EM) programs. We performed a retrospective literature review using the Journal Citation Report database and identified the top five journals in the category of 'Emergency Medicine' by their 2011 Impact Factor. We examined all publications from each journal for 2011. For each article we recorded article type, authors' names, position of authorship (first, senior or other), the author's degree and affiliated institution. We present the data in raw numbers and percentages. The 2011 EM journals with the highest impact factor were the following: Annals of Emergency Medicine, Resuscitation, Journal of Trauma, Injury, and Academic Emergency Medicine. Of the 9,298 authors published in these journals in 2011; 1,309 (15%) claimed affiliation with U.S.-based EM programs, of which 16 (1%) listed their affiliations with eight different osteopathic EM programs. The 16 authors claimed affiliation with 8 of 46 osteopathic EM programs (17%), while 1,301 authors claimed affiliation with 104 of 148 (70%) U.S.-based allopathic programs. Authors from osteopathic EM programs are under-represented in the top EM journals. With the pending ACGME/AOA merger, there is a significant opportunity for improvement in the rate of publication of osteopathic EM programs in top tier EM journals.

Self-citation rates among medical imaging journals and a possible association with impact factor

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Kurmis, Timothy P.; Kurmis, Andrew P.

2010-01-01

Purpose: Since conceptualisation in 1955, journal impact factors (IFs) have evolved as surrogate markers of perceived 'quality'. However, no previous research has explored the relationship between IF and journal self-citation rate, which may inflate this measure. Given Radiography's ongoing push to achieve Medline and ISI database inclusion, this paper aimed to quantitatively explore the frequency of self-citation and correlate this with ISI-reported IF. Methods: A review of articles published in two peer-reviewed, Medline and ISI-listed, imaging journals (Radiology and Academic Radiology), and Radiography, within in a 12-month period, was performed. The total number of citations and self-citations per article was recorded, and the results compared. Basic statistical and correlation analyses between listed IF ratings and self-citation indices were also performed. Results and Discussion: To our knowledge, this work represents the preliminary investigation exploring the association between ISI-listed IF and self-citation frequency. From the current results it can be suggested that such a relationship does exist, as demonstrated by the strongly positive correlation statistic (Pearson's r 2 = 0.99). Radiology was noted to have a considerably larger mean number of self-citations per article than the other two journals (p < 0.01), despite near-equivalent numbers of references per article. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that there may be relationship between an ISI-listed IFs and journal self-citation rates. It is hoped that this paper will be of interest in academic and research circles, both within medical imaging and more widely, and may provide impetus for discussion relating to self-citation frequency and influence on resultant IF calculations.

Pitfalls of artificial grouping and stratification of scientific journals based on their Impact Factor: a case study in Brazilian Zoology

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Fábio A. Machado

2010-08-01

Full Text Available The present contribution explores the impact of the QUALIS metric system for academic evaluation implemented by CAPES (Coordination for the Development of Personnel in Higher Education upon Brazilian Zoological research. The QUALIS system is based on the grouping and ranking of scientific journals according to their Impact Factor (IF. We examined two main points implied by this system, namely: 1 its reliability as a guideline for authors; 2 if Zoology possesses the same publication profile as Botany and Oceanography, three fields of knowledge grouped by CAPES under the subarea "BOZ" for purposes of evaluation. Additionally, we tested CAPES' recent suggestion that the area of Ecology would represent a fourth field of research compatible with the former three. Our results indicate that this system of classification is inappropriate as a guideline for publication improvement, with approximately one third of the journals changing their strata between years. We also demonstrate that the citation profile of Zoology is distinct from those of Botany and Oceanography. Finally, we show that Ecology shows an IF that is significantly different from those of Botany, Oceanography, and Zoology, and that grouping these fields together would be particularly detrimental to Zoology. We conclude that the use of only one parameter of analysis for the stratification of journals, i.e., the Impact Factor calculated for a comparatively small number of journals, fails to evaluate with accuracy the pattern of publication present in Zoology, Botany, and Oceanography. While such simplified procedure might appeals to our sense of objectivity, it dismisses any real attempt to evaluate with clarity the merit embedded in at least three very distinct aspects of scientific practice, namely: productivity, quality, and specificity.

A non-linear index to evaluate a journal's scientific impact

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Papavlasopoulos, Sozon; Poulos, Marios; Korfiatis, Nikolaos

2010-01-01

is to determine a standard threshold value in which an independent self-organizing system will decide the correlation between this value and the impact factor of a journal. We name this factor "Cited Distance Factor (CDF)" and it is extracted via a well-fitted, recurrent Elman neural network. For a case study...

A longitudinal analysis of bibliometric and impact factor trends among the core international journals of nursing, 1977-2008.

Science.gov (United States)

Smith, Derek R

2010-12-01

Although bibliometric analysis affords significant insight into the progression and distribution of information within a particular research field, detailed longitudinal studies of this type are rare within the field of nursing. This study aimed to investigate, from a bibliometric perspective, the progression and trends of core international nursing journals over the longest possible time period. A detailed bibliometric analysis was undertaken among 7 core international nursing periodicals using custom historical data sourced from the Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports®. In the 32 years between 1977 and 2008, the number of citations received by these 7 journals increased over 700%. A sustained and statistically significant (pnursing. Impressive and continual impact factor gains suggest that published nursing research is being increasingly seen, heard and cited in the international academic community. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Life and times of the impact factor: retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994-2005) and their Editors' views

Science.gov (United States)

Chew, Mabel; Villanueva, Elmer V; Van Der Weyden, Martin B

2007-01-01

Objective (1) To analyse trends in the journal impact factor (IF) of seven general medical journals (Ann Intern Med, BMJ, CMAJ, JAMA, Lancet, Med J Aust and N Engl J Med) over 12 years; and (2) to ascertain the views of these journals' past and present Editors on factors that had affected their journals' IFs during their tenure, including direct editorial policies. Design Retrospective analysis of IF data from ISI Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Reports—Science Edition, 1994 to 2005, and interviews with Editors-in-Chief. Setting Medical journal publishing. Participants Ten Editors-in-Chief of the journals, except Med J Aust, who served between 1999 and 2004. Main outcome measures IFs and component numerator and denominator data for the seven general medical journals (1994 to 2005) were collected. IFs are calculated using the formula: (Citations in year z to articles published in years x and y)/(Number of citable articles published in years x and y), where z is the current year and x and y are the previous two years. Editors' views on factors that had affected their journals' IFs were also obtained. Results IFs generally rose over the 12-year period, with the N Engl J Med having the highest IF throughout. However, percentage rises in IF relative to the baseline year of 1994 were greatest for CMAJ (about 500%) and JAMA (260%). Numerators for most journals tended to rise over this period, while denominators tended to be stable or to fall, although not always in a linear fashion. Nine of ten eligible editors were interviewed. Possible reasons given for rises in citation counts included: active recruitment of high-impact articles by courting researchers; offering authors better services; boosting the journal's media profile; more careful article selection; and increases in article citations. Most felt that going online had not affected citations. Most had no deliberate policy to publish fewer articles (lowering the IF denominator), which was sometimes the unintended

Life and times of the impact factor: retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994-2005) and their Editors' views.

Science.gov (United States)

Chew, Mabel; Villanueva, Elmer V; Van Der Weyden, Martin B

2007-03-01

(1) To analyse trends in the journal impact factor (IF) of seven general medical journals (Ann Intern Med, BMJ, CMAJ, JAMA, Lancet, Med J Aust and N Engl J Med) over 12 years; and (2) to ascertain the views of these journals' past and present Editors on factors that had affected their journals' IFs during their tenure, including direct editorial policies. Retrospective analysis of IF data from ISI Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Reports-Science Edition, 1994 to 2005, and interviews with Editors-in-Chief. Medical journal publishing. Ten Editors-in-Chief of the journals, except Med J Aust, who served between 1999 and 2004. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES IFs and component numerator and denominator data for the seven general medical journals (1994 to 2005) were collected. IFs are calculated using the formula: (Citations in year z to articles published in years x and y)/(Number of citable articles published in years x and y), where z is the current year and x and y are the previous two years. Editors' views on factors that had affected their journals' IFs were also obtained. IFs generally rose over the 12-year period, with the N Engl J Med having the highest IF throughout. However, percentage rises in IF relative to the baseline year of 1994 were greatest for CMAJ (about 500%) and JAMA (260%). Numerators for most journals tended to rise over this period, while denominators tended to be stable or to fall, although not always in a linear fashion. Nine of ten eligible editors were interviewed. Possible reasons given for rises in citation counts included: active recruitment of high-impact articles by courting researchers; offering authors better services; boosting the journal's media profile; more careful article selection; and increases in article citations. Most felt that going online had not affected citations. Most had no deliberate policy to publish fewer articles (lowering the IF denominator), which was sometimes the unintended result of other editorial policies. The two

An assessment system for rating scientific journals in the field of ergonomics and human factors

NARCIS (Netherlands)

J. Dul (Jan); W. Karwowski

2003-01-01

textabstractA method for selecting and rating scientific and professional journals representing the discipline of ergonomics and human factors is proposed. The method is based upon the journal list, impact factors and citations provided by the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI), and the

Authorship characteristics of orthodontic randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses in non-orthodontic journals with impact factor.

Science.gov (United States)

Alqaydi, Ahlam R; Kanavakis, Georgios; Naser-Ud-Din, Shazia; Athanasiou, Athanasios E

2017-12-08

This study was conducted to explore authorship characteristics and publication trends of all orthodontic randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews (SRs), and meta-analyses (MAs) published in non-orthodontic journals with impact factor (IF). Appropriate research strategies were developed to search for all articles published until December 2015, without restrictions regarding language or publication status. The initial search generated 4524 results, but after application of the inclusion criteria, the final number of articles was reduced to 274 (SRs: 152; MAs: 36; and RCTs: 86). Various authorship characteristics were recorded for each article. Frequency distributions for all parameters were explored with Pearson chi-square for independence at the 0.05 level of significance. More than half of the included publications were SRs (55.5 per cent), followed by RCTs (31.4 per cent) and MAs (13.1 per cent); one hundred seventy-eight (65 per cent) appeared in dental journals and 96 (35 per cent) were published in non-dental journals. The last decade was significantly more productive than the period before 2006, with 236 (86.1 per cent) articles published between 2006 and 2015. European countries produced 51.5 per cent of the total number of publications, followed by Asia (18.6 per cent) and North America (USA and Canada; 16.8 per cent). Studies published in journals without IF were not included. Level-1 evidence orthodontic literature published in non-orthodontic journals has significantly increased during 2006-15. This indicates a larger interest of other specialty journals in orthodontic related studies and a trend for orthodontic authors to publish their work in journals with impact in broader fields of dentistry and medicine. © The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Pitfalls of artificial grouping and stratification of scientific journals based on their Impact Factor: a case study in Brazilian Zoology

OpenAIRE

Machado, Fábio A.; Zaher, Hussam

2010-01-01

The present contribution explores the impact of the QUALIS metric system for academic evaluation implemented by CAPES (Coordination for the Development of Personnel in Higher Education) upon Brazilian Zoological research. The QUALIS system is based on the grouping and ranking of scientific journals according to their Impact Factor (IF). We examined two main points implied by this system, namely: 1) its reliability as a guideline for authors; 2) if Zoology possesses the same publication profil...

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

Science.gov (United States)

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

How can journal impact factors be normalized across fields of science? An assessment in terms of percentile ranks and fractional counts

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Leydesdorff, L.; Zhou, P.; Bornmann, L.

2013-01-01

Using the CD-ROM version of the Science Citation Index 2010 (N = 3,705 journals), we study the (combined) effects of (a) fractional counting on the impact factor (IF) and (b) transformation of the skewed citation distributions into a distribution of 100 percentiles and six percentile rank classes

Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge Management. Journal Home · ABOUT THIS JOURNAL · Advanced Search · Current Issue · Archives · Journal Home > Vol 7, No 2 (2016) >. Log in or Register to get access to full text downloads.

Representation of Nursing Scientists from German-speaking countries in High Impact Journals. A bibliometric publication analysis

Science.gov (United States)

Hirt, Julian; Buhtz, Christian; Mersdorf, Benedikt; Meyer, Gabriele

2018-02-01

Background: The frequency of publications by nursing scientists from the German-speaking area in journals with a high impact factor is an indicator for participation of the discipline in the international discourse. Previous publication analyses focused on nursing science journals only and regularly found an underrepresentation of experimental studies and clinical topics. Aim: To identify and analyse the number of publications by nursing scientists from Germany, Austria and German-speaking Switzerland in international high impact journals. Method: The Journal Citation Reports were used to identify nursing relevant categories of journals in which the highest 10 % of the years 2010 to 2014 were selected according to the 5-year Impact Factor. Inclusion of publications and data extraction were carried out by two independent persons. Results: 106939 publications from 126 journals were screened; 100 publications were identified with 229 contributions by 114 nursing scientists. 42 % of studies are observational and 11 % are experimental. The majority of studies are clinically oriented (55 %). More than 50 % have been published in the past two years. Conclusions: The number of publications by nursing scientists from the German-speaking countries in High Impact Journals is low. There is an increase throughout the observation period. In opposite to former analyses a higher proportion of clinical research has been found.

Sense and nonsense about the impact factor

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Opthof, T.

1997-01-01

The impact factor is based on citations of papers published by a scientific journal. It has been published since 1961 by the Institute for Scientific Information. It may be regarded as an estimate of the citation rate of a journal's papers, and the higher its value, the higher the scientific esteem

Open Access Journal Policies: A Systematic Analysis of Radiology Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Narayan, Anand; Lobner, Katie; Fritz, Jan

2018-02-01

The open access movement has pushed for greater access to scientific knowledge by expanding access to scientific journal articles. There is limited information about the extent to which open access policies have been adopted by radiology journals. We performed a systematic analysis to ascertain the proportion of radiology journals with open access options. A search was performed with the assistance of a clinical informationist. Full and mixed English-language diagnostic and interventional radiology Web of Science journals (impact factors > 1.0) were included. Nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, physics, and solicitation-only journals were excluded. Primary outcome was open access option (yes or no) with additional outcomes including presence or absence of embargo, complete or partial copyright transfer, publication fees, and self-archiving policies. Secondary outcomes included journal citations, journal impact factors, immediacy, Eigenfactor, and article influence scores. Independent double readings were performed with differences resolved by consensus, supplemented by contacting editorial staff at each journal. In all, 125 journals were identified; review yielded 49 journals (39%, mean impact factor of 2.61). Thirty-six of the journals had open access options (73.4%), and four journals were exclusively open access (8.2%). Twelve-month embargoes were most commonly cited (90.6%) with 28.6% of journals stating that they did not require a complete transfer of copyright. Prices for open access options ranged from $750 to $4,000 (median $3,000). No statistically significant differences were found in journal impact measures comparing journals with open access options to journals without open access options. Diagnostic and interventional radiology journals have widely adopted open access options with a few radiology journals being exclusively open access. Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Citations for Randomized Controlled Trials in Sepsis Literature: The Halo Effect Caused by Journal Impact Factor.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Zhongheng Zhang

Full Text Available Citations for randomized controlled trials (RCT are important for the dissemination of study results. However, predictors of citations for RCTs have not been investigated. The study aimed to investigate the predictors of citations for RCTs in sepsis literature. RCTs that investigated the efficacy of treatment strategies on clinical outcomes in sepsis patients were included, and publication dates were restricted to the period from 2000 to 2016. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews and interventions. A multivariable linear regression model was built to investigate the independent variables associated with total citations. In total, 160 RCTs met our inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. The median of total citations was 28.5 (IQR: 6-76. The journal impact factor (IF for articles was 6.312 (IQR: 3.143-7.214. The dependent variable was transformed by the square root to improve normality and meet the assumption of homoscedasticity. The journal IF (coefficient: 0.2; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.25 was independently associated with total citations. Large samples were associated with more total citations (coefficient: 0.0026; 95% CI: 0.0013, 0.0039. The study demonstrated that the journal IF was a major determinant of the RCT's total citation number.

Factors Affecting Journal Quality Indicator in Scopus (SCImago Journal Rank) in Obstetrics and Gynecology Journals: a Longitudinal Study (1999-2013).

Science.gov (United States)

Jamali, Jamshid; Salehi-Marzijarani, Mohammad; Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohammad Taghi

2014-12-01

Awareness of the latest scientific research and publishing articles in top journals is one of the major concerns of health researchers. In this study, we first introduced top journals of obstetrics and gynecology field based on their Impact Factor (IF), Eigenfactor Score (ES) and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator indexed in Scopus databases and then the scientometric features of longitudinal changes of SJR in this field were presented. In our analytical and bibiliometric study, we included all the journals of obstetrics and gynecology field which were indexed by Scopus from 1999 to 2013. The scientometric features in Scopus were derived from SCImago Institute and IF and ES were obtained from Journal Citation Report through the Institute for Scientific Information. Generalized Estimating Equation was used to assess the scientometric features affecting SJR. From 256 journals reviewed, 54.2% and 41.8% were indexed in the Pubmed and the Web of Sciences, respectively. Human Reproduction Update based on the IF (5.924±2.542) and SJR (2.682±1.185), and American Journal of obstetrics and gynecology based on the ES (0.05685±0.00633) obtained the first rank among the other journals. Time, Index in Pubmed, H_index, Citable per Document, Cites per Document, and IF affected changes of SJR in the period of study. Our study showed a significant association between SJR and scientometric features in obstetrics and gynecology journals. According to this relationship, SJR may be an appropriate index for assessing journal quality.

ANÁLISIS DEL ÍNDICE DE IMPACTO EN LA ESPECIALIDAD DE CARDIOLOGÍA SEGÚN EL JOURNAL CITATION REPORTS EN EL PERÍODO 2006-2008 / Analysis of the impact factor in cardiology according to the Journal Citation Reports during the period 2006-2008

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Yenni González Lugo

2010-03-01

Full Text Available Heart diseases are at the top of the health statistics concerning the main causes of death in the world. This fact reveals the need of focussing the health scientific policy toward the diagnosis and treatment of these diseases. Currently, the best results in this field are not widely published; however, the challenge for Cuban publications, in general, is to reach a better visibility. In order to meet this challenge, a bibliometric study of the Cardiology journals which are available in the Web of Science was carried out, having the Impact Factor (IF as the main variable. The issues of the JCR Science Edition during the period from 2006 to 2008 were analysed. The results showed that there is not a sufficient amount of journals on this field, in spite of the fact that there is a group which has increased its number, year after year, with a relatively high impact factor. Although the vast majority of these journals are published in English, some others, of high renown, are published in Spanish or are multilingual. The Journal of the American College of Cardiology was the journal with the highest impact factor in 2008; therefore, it is the one with the highest visibility in this specialty. Finally, it was determined that most of the Cardiology journals are from North America, mainly from the US, while only 6 of them are from Europe.

Overview of journal metrics

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Kihong Kim

2018-02-01

Full Text Available Various kinds of metrics used for the quantitative evaluation of scholarly journals are reviewed. The impact factor and related metrics including the immediacy index and the aggregate impact factor, which are provided by the Journal Citation Reports, are explained in detail. The Eigenfactor score and the article influence score are also reviewed. In addition, journal metrics such as CiteScore, Source Normalized Impact per Paper, SCImago Journal Rank, h-index, and g-index are discussed. Limitations and problems that these metrics have are pointed out. We should be cautious to rely on those quantitative measures too much when we evaluate journals or researchers.

JOURNAL ANALYSIS ON OPHTHALMOLOGY AND OTHERS

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Denise de Freitas

Full Text Available Objective: To update knowledge and methods to access and view the journals included in Qualis of CAPES Medicine III, and how to measure the impact factor. Method: Document review on the attempt to verify the way Qualis uses for ranking journals cited by the post-graduate programs of Medicine III in their evaluation periods, and the impact factors obtained by journals indexing base. Results: The classification is annual and are ranking in strata ranging from A1, the highest, and A2; B1; B2; B3; B4; B5; C. The latter has zero evaluation weight. These strata take as reference the impact factor of the journals listed by the programs. The same journal can be classified into different Qualis in other areas, and this is no inconsistency, but expressed the assigned value, in each area, at that particular journal. The Impact Factor is measured using the Journal of Citation Report in Web of Knowledge website. Conclusion: Using the criteria established by WebQualis for stratification of journals there is a quality guidance of what is produced by the program and, based on it, can be made scientific comparison of program performance. Consulting the JCR is recommended because it defines exactly what is the journal's impact factor; Qualis stratifies numerical intervals and not individual journal specificity.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Review of Selected Macroeconomic Factors Impacting Building ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management ... This study therefore investigates the impact of macro-economic indicators on the prices of ... factors, Construction projects, Procurement, prices, Building Materials, Delivery ...

Information Impact | Journal of Information and Knowledge ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Information Impact | Journal of Information and Knowledge Management

Information Impact | Journal of Information and Knowledge Management. 77 ... Libraries all over the world are applying information and communication ..... Bank Branch Performance, The International Journal on Advances in ICT for Emerging.

An Overview and Analysis of Journal Operations, Journal Publication Patterns, and Journal Impact in School Psychology and Related Fields

Science.gov (United States)

Floyd, Randy G.; Cooley, Kathryn M.; Arnett, James E.; Fagan, Thomas K.; Mercer, Sterett H.; Hingle, Christine

2011-01-01

This article describes the results of three studies designed to understand better the journal operations, publishing practices, and impact of school psychology journals in recent years. The first study presents the results of a survey focusing on journal operations and peer-review practices that was completed by 61 journal editors of school…

Characteristics of Orthopedic Publications in High-Impact General Medical Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Nwachukwu, Benedict U; Kahlenberg, Cynthia A; Lehman, Jason D; Lyman, Stephen; Marx, Robert G

2017-05-01

Orthopedic studies are occasionally published in high-impact general medical journals; these studies are often given high visibility and have significant potential to impact health care policy and inform clinical decision-making. The purpose of this review was to investigate the characteristics of operative orthopedic studies published in high-impact medical journals. The number of orthopedic studies published in high-impact medical journals is relatively low; however, these studies demonstrate methodological characteristics that may bias toward nonoperative treatment. Careful analysis and interpretation of orthopedic studies published in these journals is warranted. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(3):e405-e412.]. Copyright 2017, SLACK Incorporated.

The impact factor of an open access journal does not contribute to an article’s citations [version 1; referees: 2 approved

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

SK Chua

2017-03-01

Full Text Available Background Citations of papers are positively influenced by the journal’s impact factor (IF. For non-open access (non-OA journals, this influence may be due to the fact that high-IF journals are more often purchased by libraries, and are therefore more often available to researchers, than low-IF journals. This positive influence has not, however, been shown specifically for papers published in open access (OA journals, which are universally accessible, and do not need library purchase. It is therefore important to ascertain if the IF influences citations in OA journals too. Methods 203 randomized controlled trials (102 OA and 101 non-OA published in January 2011 were included in the study. Five-year citations for papers published in OA journals were compared to those for non-OA journals. Source papers were derived from PubMed. Citations were retrieved from Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases. The Thompson-Reuter’s IF was used. Results OA journals were found to have significantly more citations overall compared to non-OA journals (median 15.5 vs 12, p=0.039. The IF did not correlate with citations for OA journals (Spearman’s rho =0.187, p=0.60. The increase in the citations with increasing IF was minimal for OA journals (beta coefficient = 3.346, 95% CI -0.464, 7.156, p=0.084. In contrast, the IF did show moderate correlation with citations for articles published in non-OA journals (Spearman’s rho=0.514, p<0.001. The increase in the number of citations was also significant (beta coefficient = 4.347, 95% CI 2.42, 6.274, p<0.001. Conclusion It is better to publish in an OA journal for more citations. It may not be worth paying high publishing fees for higher IF journals, because there is minimal gain in terms of increased number of citations. On the other hand, if one wishes to publish in a non-OA journal, it is better to choose one with a high IF.

Impact of Journaling on Students’ Self-Efficacy and Locus of Control

OpenAIRE

Krista K. Fritson, PsyD

2008-01-01

While considerable research has examined the academic and cognitive value of journaling, little has examined the psychological impact of journaling on the personal development of college students. Research on cognitive-behavioral therapy indicates that journaling can have a positive impact on individuals’ self-growth and intrapersonal characteristics. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of classroom-based journaling on students’ self-efficacy and locus of control. Students in t...

Reporting of ethical committee approval and patient consent in the Portuguese Journal of Pulmonology and in the other Portuguese medical journals with impact factor

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

M.J. Bernardes

2012-11-01

Full Text Available Introduction: Reporting of ethical committee (EC approval and patient consent in publications involving human subjects may be lower than recommended. In this paper this ethical issue was analysed in the Portuguese Journal of Pulmonology and in the other two Portuguese medical journals with impact factor indexed in the ISI Web of Knowledge. Methods: Reporting of EC approval and patient consent was searched in all publications involving human subjects published in the Acta Médica Portuguesa, Acta Reumatológica Portuguesa and Portuguese Journal of Pulmonology, from the 1st July 2010 until the 30th June 2011. The search also looked for the involvement of vulnerable and potentially identifiable subjects. Results: Most of the analysed publications, which included a considerable proportion of vulnerable (23% and of potentially identifiable case reports (14%, were case reports (49%. Overall EC approval ranged from 0% to 28%, in case reports and prospective studies, respectively, whereas overall patient consent ranged from 0% to 26%. There were not statistically significant differences in results among the selected journals. Conclusions: Reporting of EC approval and patient consent in the three leading Portuguese medical journals has been lower than in their leading world counterparts. This should be taken into account and further audited in future, not only for the protection of the research subjects but also to maintain public trust in the process. Resumo: Introdução: A referência a aprovação de comissão de ética (CE e a consentimento dos doentes, nas publicações que envolvem humanos, poderá ser inferior à recomendada. Neste artigo, esta situação foi analisada na Revista Portuguesa de Pneumologia e nas outras 2 revistas médicas portuguesas com fator de impacto indexadas na ISI Web of Knowledge. Métodos: A referência a aprovação de CE e a consentimento dos doentes foi pesquisada em todas as publicações que envolveram humanos na

A COMPARATIVE BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF FINANCE PAPERS PUBLISHED IN HIGH IMPACT JOURNALS AND DEVELOPING COUNTRY–ADDRESSED JOURNALS: THE CASE OF TURKISH JOURNALS

OpenAIRE

Esen, Sinan; Takıl, Davut; Tunahan, Hakan

2018-01-01

The aim of this study is to compare finance articles published in highest-impact journals and developing country–addressed journals from a bibliometric perspective. For this purpose, it compares finance papers published in the Turkish-originated journals Journal of Economics, Business and Finance (IIF) and Journal of Accounting and Finance (known as Mufad) with those published in the world’s most influential journals, Journal of Finance (JOF) and the Review of Financial Studies (RFS), in term...

The effect of journal impact factor, reporting conflicts, and reporting funding sources, on standardized effect sizes in back pain trials: a systematic review and meta-regression.

Science.gov (United States)

Froud, Robert; Bjørkli, Tom; Bright, Philip; Rajendran, Dévan; Buchbinder, Rachelle; Underwood, Martin; Evans, David; Eldridge, Sandra

2015-11-30

Low back pain is a common and costly health complaint for which there are several moderately effective treatments. In some fields there is evidence that funder and financial conflicts are associated with trial outcomes. It is not clear whether effect sizes in back pain trials relate to journal impact factor, reporting conflicts of interest, or reporting funding. We performed a systematic review of English-language papers reporting randomised controlled trials of treatments for non-specific low back pain, published between 2006-2012. We modelled the relationship using 5-year journal impact factor, and categories of reported of conflicts of interest, and categories of reported funding (reported none and reported some, compared to not reporting these) using meta-regression, adjusting for sample size, and publication year. We also considered whether impact factor could be predicted by the direction of outcome, or trial sample size. We could abstract data to calculate effect size in 99 of 146 trials that met our inclusion criteria. Effect size is not associated with impact factor, reporting of funding source, or reporting of conflicts of interest. However, explicitly reporting 'no trial funding' is strongly associated with larger absolute values of effect size (adjusted β=1.02 (95 % CI 0.44 to 1.59), P=0.001). Impact factor increases by 0.008 (0.004 to 0.012) per unit increase in trial sample size (Psources of funding, and conflicts of interest reflects positively on research and publisher conduct in the field. Strong evidence of a large association between absolute magnitude of effect size and explicit reporting of 'no funding' suggests authors of unfunded trials are likely to report larger effect sizes, notwithstanding direction. This could relate in part to quality, resources, and/or how pragmatic a trial is.

Outcome discrepancies and selective reporting: impacting the leading journals?

Science.gov (United States)

Fleming, Padhraig S; Koletsi, Despina; Dwan, Kerry; Pandis, Nikolaos

2015-01-01

Selective outcome reporting of either interesting or positive research findings is problematic, running the risk of poorly-informed treatment decisions. We aimed to assess the extent of outcome and other discrepancies and possible selective reporting between registry entries and published reports among leading medical journals. Randomized controlled trials published over a 6-month period from July to December 31st, 2013, were identified in five high impact medical journals: The Lancet, British Medical Journal, New England Journal of Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine and Journal of American Medical Association were obtained. Discrepancies between published studies and registry entries were identified and related to factors including registration timing, source of funding and presence of statistically significant results. Over the 6-month period, 137 RCTs were found. Of these, 18% (n = 25) had discrepancies related to primary outcomes with the primary outcome changed in 15% (n = 20). Moreover, differences relating to non-primary outcomes were found in 64% (n = 87) with both omission of pre-specified non-primary outcomes (39%) and introduction of new non-primary outcomes (44%) common. No relationship between primary or non-primary outcome change and registration timing (prospective or retrospective; P = 0.11), source of funding (P = 0.92) and presence of statistically significant results (P = 0.92) was found. Discrepancies between registry entries and published articles for primary and non-primary outcomes were common among trials published in leading medical journals. Novel approaches are required to address this problem.

Impact of Journaling on Students' Self-Efficacy and Locus of Control

Science.gov (United States)

Fritson, Krista K.

2008-01-01

While considerable research has examined the academic and cognitive value of journaling, little has examined the psychological impact of journaling on the personal development of college students. Research on cognitive-behavioral therapy indicates that journaling can have a positive impact on individuals' self-growth and intrapersonal…

Conflicts of interest at medical journals

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Lundh, Andreas; Barbateskovic, Marija; Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn

2010-01-01

for journals. We investigated industry-supported trials' influence on journal impact factors and revenue. METHODS AND FINDINGS: we sampled six major medical journals (Annals of Internal Medicine, Archives of Internal Medicine, BMJ, JAMA, The Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine [NEJM]). For each journal......BACKGROUND: transparency in reporting of conflict of interest is an increasingly important aspect of publication in medical journals. Publication of large industry-supported trials may generate many citations and journal income through reprint sales and thereby be a source of conflicts of interest......, we identified randomised trials published in 1996-1997 and 2005-2006 using PubMed, and categorized the type of financial support. Using Web of Science, we investigated citations of industry-supported trials and the influence on journal impact factors over a ten-year period. We contacted journal...

期刊影響力指標探析 An Overview of the Journal Impact Indicators

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ming-Yueh Tsay

2011-11-01

Full Text Available 引文索引資料庫中期刊引用數據之計量指標是學術評鑑最常使用之準則，本文首先以Thomson Reuters 建置為學術界與圖書資訊服務界廣為使用之JCR(Journal Citation Reports, JCR為基礎，並旁及在網路化與數位化環境下，所產生的引文索引資料庫與系統，計有Elsevier 的Scopus系統與西班牙SCImago Group。針對其所開發之指標內容及其應用與限制，加以探討，進而希冀提供學術評鑑單位、圖書館、期刊出版者、資料庫製作者、作者與使用者之參考。This article presents the journal impact indicators, mainly covered in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR, Web of Science, that developed by the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI, today part of Thomson Reuters. These indicators include total publications, total citations, 2-year impact factor, 5-year impact factor, immediacy index, cited half-life, citing half-life, self-citing rate, self-cited rate, H index, Eigenfactor score, article influence score. In addition to JCR of WOS, Scopus supplies other unique journal impact indicators, i.e., % not cited, source normalized impact per paper (SNIP and SCImago journal rank (SJR. Moreover, the applications and limitations of these indicators are also discussed.

Impact of Journaling on Students’ Self-Efficacy and Locus of Control

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Krista K. Fritson, PsyD

2008-08-01

Full Text Available While considerable research has examined the academic and cognitive value of journaling, little has examined the psychological impact of journaling on the personal development of college students. Research on cognitive-behavioral therapy indicates that journaling can have a positive impact on individuals’ self-growth and intrapersonal characteristics. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of classroom-based journaling on students’ self-efficacy and locus of control. Students in two undergraduate courses were required to complete weekly journal assignments; one class received targeted information on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT and one class did not. Students completed pre-, mid-, and postcourse assessments on self-efficacy, locus of control, and learning. Results revealed that self-efficacy scores for both groups significantly improved after the early journaling assignments; however, there were no differences between those who received direct CBT instruction and those who did not. These findings indicate that journaling may have important psychological benefits above and beyond its expected academic and cognitive outcomes.

Impact of Journaling on Students’ Self-Efficacy and Locus of Control

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Krista K. Fritson

2008-08-01

Full Text Available While considerable research has examined the academic and cognitive value of journaling, little has examined the psychological impact of journaling on the personal development of college students. Research on cognitive-behavioral therapy indicates that journaling can have a positive impact on individuals’ self-growth and intrapersonal characteristics. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of classroom-based journaling on students’ self-efficacy and locus of control. Students in two undergraduate courses were required to complete weekly journal assignments; one class received targeted information on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT and one class did not. Students completed pre-, mid-, and post-course assessments on self-efficacy, locus of control, and learning. Results revealed that self-efficacy scores for both groups significantly improved after the early journaling assignments; however, there were no differences between those who received direct CBT instruction and those who did not. These findings indicate that journaling may have important psychological benefits above and beyond its expected academic and cognitive outcomes.

Information Impact | Journal of Information and Knowledge ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

USER

Information Impact | Journal of Information and Knowledge Management ... Abstract. This study was designed to determine the impact of collaboration on research and teaching .... delivery of quality instruction. ... for doing Collaborative projects, and there ... reveals that co-construction of knowledge ..... Get relevant materials.

Qualitative and Quantitative Status and International Visibility of Iranian Journals Indexed in Journal Citation Reports

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Mohammadamin Erfanmanesh

2016-12-01

Full Text Available Objectives: The present study aims to investigate the international status and visibility of Iranian journals which have been indexed in Journal Citation Reports (JCR. Accordingly, the number of international papers, citations and editorial board members of each journal was studied. Moreover, various measures were utilized to compare the quality of Iranian journals with their international counterparts. Method: Current paper applied scientometric research method. A total of 16471 papers which published in 38 Iranian journals and indexed by the JCR 2013 were selected as the population of the study. Web of Science (WoS, JCR and journals’ website were used for data gathering. Results: Results of the study revealed that foreign researchers have published 34.8% of papers published in Iranian ISI journals. Moreover, only 30.6% of citations to Iranian ISI journals have been received from foreign papers or Iranian internationally collaborative papers. The results showed that Iranian researchers accounted for 66.4% of editorial board member of all studied journals, while foreign researchers only occupied 33.6% of the editorial board positions. Based on the findings, only two Iranian journals have impact factors above the median of the journals in the disciplinary category areas in which they are classified in JCR. Furthermore, only 8 Iranian journals have ever been placed in the 1st and 2nd quartile of journals of the same field in the JCR. Findings also showed that 36 out of the 38 Iranian journals have mostly cited by journals with higher median impact factors than cited journals. Conclusion: The findings indicate that the share of international papers, citations and editorial board memberships is low in Iranian ISI journals. Moreover, Iranian journals’ impact factor was below of those of the leading journals.

Choosing the right journal for your systematic review.

Science.gov (United States)

Betini, Marluci; Volpato, Enilze S N; Anastácio, Guilherme D J; de Faria, Renata T B G; El Dib, Regina

2014-12-01

The importance of systematic reviews (SRs) as an aid to decision making in health care has led to an increasing interest in the development of this type of study. When selecting a target journal for publication, authors generally seek out higher impact factor journals. This study aimed to determine the percentage of scientific medical journals that publish SRs according to their impact factors (>2.63) and to determine whether those journals require tools that aim to improve SR reporting and meta-analyses. In our cross-sectional study showing how to choose the right journal for a SR, we selected and analysed scientific journals available in a digital library with a minimum Institute for Scientific Information impact factor of 2.63. We analysed 622 scientific journals, 435 (69.94%) of which publish SRs. Of those 435 journals, 135 (21.60%) provide instructions for authors that mention SRs. Three hundred journals (48.34%) do not discuss criteria for article acceptance in the instructions for authors section, but do publish SRs. Only 118 (27.00%) scientific journals require items to be reported in accordance with the specific SR reporting forms. The majority of the journals do not mention the acceptance of SRs in the instructions for authors section. Only a few journals require that SRs meet specific reporting guidelines, making interpretation of their findings across studies challenging. There is no correlation between the impact factor of the journal and its acceptance of SRs for publication. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Citation distribution profile in Brazilian journals of general medicine.

Science.gov (United States)

Lustosa, Luiggi Araujo; Chalco, Mario Edmundo Pastrana; Borba, Cecília de Melo; Higa, André Eizo; Almeida, Renan Moritz Varnier Rodrigues

2012-01-01

Impact factors are currently the bibliometric index most used for evaluating scientific journals. However, the way in which they are used, for instance concerning the study or journal types analyzed, can markedly interfere with estimate reliability. This study aimed to analyze the citation distribution pattern in three Brazilian journals of general medicine. This was a descriptive study based on numbers of citations of scientific studies published by three Brazilian journals of general medicine. The journals analyzed were São Paulo Medical Journal, Clinics and Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira. This survey used data available from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) platform, from which the total number of papers published in each journal in 2007-2008 and the number of citations of these papers in 2009 were obtained. From these data, the citation distribution was derived and journal impact factors (average number of citations) were estimated. These factors were then compared with those directly available from the ISI Journal of Citation Reports (JCR). Respectively, 134, 203 and 192 papers were published by these journals during the period analyzed. The observed citation distributions were highly skewed, such that many papers had few citations and a small percentage had many citations. It was not possible to identify any specific pattern for the most cited papers or to exactly reproduce the JCR impact factors. Use of measures like "impact factors", which characterize citations through averages, does not adequately represent the citation distribution in the journals analyzed.

Journalism 2.0: Exploring the Impact of Mobile and Social Media on Journalism Education

Science.gov (United States)

Cochrane, Thomas; Sissons, Helen; Mulrennan, Danni; Pamatatau, Richard

2013-01-01

This paper explores the impact of social media upon journalism education from two perspectives: both from the pedagogical changes Web 2.0 and mobile devices enable, and within the context of the changes in journalism that social media use are driving. A participatory action research approach was adopted, beginning with the establishment of a…

Citation distribution profile in Brazilian journals of general medicine

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Luiggi Araujo Lustosa

Full Text Available CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Impact factors are currently the bibliometric index most used for evaluating scientific journals. However, the way in which they are used, for instance concerning the study or journal types analyzed, can markedly interfere with estimate reliability. This study aimed to analyze the citation distribution pattern in three Brazilian journals of general medicine. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a descriptive study based on numbers of citations of scientific studies published by three Brazilian journals of general medicine. METHODS: The journals analyzed were São Paulo Medical Journal, Clinics and Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira. This survey used data available from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI platform, from which the total number of papers published in each journal in 2007-2008 and the number of citations of these papers in 2009 were obtained. From these data, the citation distribution was derived and journal impact factors (average number of citations were estimated. These factors were then compared with those directly available from the ISI Journal of Citation Reports (JCR. RESULTS: Respectively, 134, 203 and 192 papers were published by these journals during the period analyzed. The observed citation distributions were highly skewed, such that many papers had few citations and a small percentage had many citations. It was not possible to identify any specific pattern for the most cited papers or to exactly reproduce the JCR impact factors. CONCLUSION: Use of measures like "impact factors", which characterize citations through averages, does not adequately represent the citation distribution in the journals analyzed.

Journal information flow in nanotechnology

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Andrievski, Rostislav A.; Klyuchareva, Svetlana V.

2011-01-01

The nanotechnology development is accompanied by an intensive growth of information flow which is specially noticeable as applied to journal information flow. Now over the world there are the 69 nano-titled journals with the impact factor and/or a settled periodicity as well as the 70 those which lack stability periodicity and are in an organization stage. Only 49 nano-titled have the impact factor with the comparatively high mean value of about 3.44. The domestic nano-titled journals published in Russia, India, China, and other countries are also considered. The attention is taken that in the 2006–2010 period the 95 new nano-titled journals were organized and in 2011 this process is continuing and seems to be the most impressive. Many nano-related journals (including classical physical, chemical and materials science ones) are also described and discussed.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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

Publication trends of shared decision making in 15 high impact medical journals: a full-text review with bibliometric analysis.

Science.gov (United States)

Blanc, Xavier; Collet, Tinh-Hai; Auer, Reto; Fischer, Roland; Locatelli, Isabella; Iriarte, Pablo; Krause, Jan; Légaré, France; Cornuz, Jacques

2014-08-09

Shared Decision Making (SDM) is increasingly advocated as a model for medical decision making. However, there is still low use of SDM in clinical practice. High impact factor journals might represent an efficient way for its dissemination. We aimed to identify and characterize publication trends of SDM in 15 high impact medical journals. We selected the 15 general and internal medicine journals with the highest impact factor publishing original articles, letters and editorials. We retrieved publications from 1996 to 2011 through the full-text search function on each journal website and abstracted bibliometric data. We included publications of any type containing the phrase "shared decision making" or five other variants in their abstract or full text. These were referred to as SDM publications. A polynomial Poisson regression model with logarithmic link function was used to assess the evolution across the period of the number of SDM publications according to publication characteristics. We identified 1285 SDM publications out of 229,179 publications in 15 journals from 1996 to 2011. The absolute number of SDM publications by journal ranged from 2 to 273 over 16 years. SDM publications increased both in absolute and relative numbers per year, from 46 (0.32% relative to all publications from the 15 journals) in 1996 to 165 (1.17%) in 2011. This growth was exponential (P Full-text search retrieved ten times more SDM publications than a similar PubMed search (1285 vs. 119 respectively). This review in full-text showed that SDM publications increased exponentially in major medical journals from 1996 to 2011. This growth might reflect an increased dissemination of the SDM concept to the medical community.

Misconduct Policies in High-Impact Biomedical Journals

Science.gov (United States)

Bosch, Xavier; Hernández, Cristina; Pericas, Juan M.; Doti, Pamela; Marušić, Ana

2012-01-01

Background It is not clear which research misconduct policies are adopted by biomedical journals. This study assessed the prevalence and content policies of the most influential biomedical journals on misconduct and procedures for handling and responding to allegations of misconduct. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study of misconduct policies of 399 high-impact biomedical journals in 27 biomedical categories of the Journal Citation Reports in December 2011. Journal websites were reviewed for information relevant to misconduct policies. Results Of 399 journals, 140 (35.1%) provided explicit definitions of misconduct. Falsification was explicitly mentioned by 113 (28.3%) journals, fabrication by 104 (26.1%), plagiarism by 224 (56.1%), duplication by 242 (60.7%) and image manipulation by 154 (38.6%). Procedures for responding to misconduct were described in 179 (44.9%) websites, including retraction, (30.8%) and expression of concern (16.3%). Plagiarism-checking services were used by 112 (28.1%) journals. The prevalences of all types of misconduct policies were higher in journals that endorsed any policy from editors’ associations, Office of Research Integrity or professional societies compared to those that did not state adherence to these policy-producing bodies. Elsevier and Wiley-Blackwell had the most journals included (22.6% and 14.8%, respectively), with Wiley journals having greater a prevalence of misconduct definition and policies on falsification, fabrication and expression of concern and Elsevier of plagiarism-checking services. Conclusions Only a third of top-ranking peer-reviewed journals had publicly-available definitions of misconduct and less than a half described procedures for handling allegations of misconduct. As endorsement of international policies from policy-producing bodies was positively associated with implementation of policies and procedures, journals and their publishers should standardize their policies globally in order to

Misconduct policies in high-impact biomedical journals.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Xavier Bosch

Full Text Available It is not clear which research misconduct policies are adopted by biomedical journals. This study assessed the prevalence and content policies of the most influential biomedical journals on misconduct and procedures for handling and responding to allegations of misconduct.We conducted a cross-sectional study of misconduct policies of 399 high-impact biomedical journals in 27 biomedical categories of the Journal Citation Reports in December 2011. Journal websites were reviewed for information relevant to misconduct policies.Of 399 journals, 140 (35.1% provided explicit definitions of misconduct. Falsification was explicitly mentioned by 113 (28.3% journals, fabrication by 104 (26.1%, plagiarism by 224 (56.1%, duplication by 242 (60.7% and image manipulation by 154 (38.6%. Procedures for responding to misconduct were described in 179 (44.9% websites, including retraction, (30.8% and expression of concern (16.3%. Plagiarism-checking services were used by 112 (28.1% journals. The prevalences of all types of misconduct policies were higher in journals that endorsed any policy from editors' associations, Office of Research Integrity or professional societies compared to those that did not state adherence to these policy-producing bodies. Elsevier and Wiley-Blackwell had the most journals included (22.6% and 14.8%, respectively, with Wiley journals having greater a prevalence of misconduct definition and policies on falsification, fabrication and expression of concern and Elsevier of plagiarism-checking services.Only a third of top-ranking peer-reviewed journals had publicly-available definitions of misconduct and less than a half described procedures for handling allegations of misconduct. As endorsement of international policies from policy-producing bodies was positively associated with implementation of policies and procedures, journals and their publishers should standardize their policies globally in order to increase public trust in the

Rankings and Trends in Citation Patterns of Communication Journals

Science.gov (United States)

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…

For 481 biomedical open access journals, articles are not searchable in the Directory of Open Access Journals nor in conventional biomedical databases.

Science.gov (United States)

Liljekvist, Mads Svane; Andresen, Kristoffer; Pommergaard, Hans-Christian; Rosenberg, Jacob

2015-01-01

Background. Open access (OA) journals allows access to research papers free of charge to the reader. Traditionally, biomedical researchers use databases like MEDLINE and EMBASE to discover new advances. However, biomedical OA journals might not fulfill such databases' criteria, hindering dissemination. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a database exclusively listing OA journals. The aim of this study was to investigate DOAJ's coverage of biomedical OA journals compared with the conventional biomedical databases. Methods. Information on all journals listed in four conventional biomedical databases (MEDLINE, PubMed Central, EMBASE and SCOPUS) and DOAJ were gathered. Journals were included if they were (1) actively publishing, (2) full OA, (3) prospectively indexed in one or more database, and (4) of biomedical subject. Impact factor and journal language were also collected. DOAJ was compared with conventional databases regarding the proportion of journals covered, along with their impact factor and publishing language. The proportion of journals with articles indexed by DOAJ was determined. Results. In total, 3,236 biomedical OA journals were included in the study. Of the included journals, 86.7% were listed in DOAJ. Combined, the conventional biomedical databases listed 75.0% of the journals; 18.7% in MEDLINE; 36.5% in PubMed Central; 51.5% in SCOPUS and 50.6% in EMBASE. Of the journals in DOAJ, 88.7% published in English and 20.6% had received impact factor for 2012 compared with 93.5% and 26.0%, respectively, for journals in the conventional biomedical databases. A subset of 51.1% and 48.5% of the journals in DOAJ had articles indexed from 2012 and 2013, respectively. Of journals exclusively listed in DOAJ, one journal had received an impact factor for 2012, and 59.6% of the journals had no content from 2013 indexed in DOAJ. Conclusions. DOAJ is the most complete registry of biomedical OA journals compared with five conventional biomedical databases

Relationship between Journal-Ranking Metrics for a Multidisciplinary Set of Journals

Science.gov (United States)

Perera, Upeksha; Wijewickrema, Manjula

2018-01-01

Ranking of scholarly journals is important to many parties. Studying the relationships among various ranking metrics is key to understanding the significance of one metric based on another. This research investigates the relationship among four major journal-ranking indicators: the impact factor (IF), the Eigenfactor score (ES), the "h."…

Core journals that publish clinical trials of physical therapy interventions.

Science.gov (United States)

Costa, Leonardo Oliveira Pena; Moseley, Anne M; Sherrington, Catherine; Maher, Christopher G; Herbert, Robert D; Elkins, Mark R

2010-11-01

The objective of this study was to identify core journals in physical therapy by identifying those that publish the most randomized controlled trials of physical therapy interventions, provide the highest-quality reports of randomized controlled trials, and have the highest journal impact factors. This study was an audit of a bibliographic database. All trials indexed in the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) were analyzed. Journals that had published at least 80 trials were selected. The journals were ranked in 4 ways: number of trials published; mean total PEDro score of the trials published in the journal, regardless of publication year; mean total PEDro score of the trials published in the journal from 2000 to 2009; and 2008 journal impact factor. The top 5 core journals in physical therapy, ranked by the total number of trials published, were Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Clinical Rehabilitation, Spine, British Medical Journal (BMJ), and Chest. When the mean total PEDro score was used as the ranking criterion, the top 5 journals were Journal of Physiotherapy, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Stroke, Spine, and Clinical Rehabilitation. When the mean total PEDro score of the trials published from 2000 to 2009 was used as the ranking criterion, the top 5 journals were Journal of Physiotherapy, JAMA, Lancet, BMJ, and Pain. The most highly ranked physical therapy-specific journals were Physical Therapy (ranked eighth on the basis of the number of trials published) and Journal of Physiotherapy (ranked first on the basis of the quality of trials). Finally, when the 2008 impact factor was used for ranking, the top 5 journals were JAMA, Lancet, BMJ, American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, and Thorax. There were no significant relationships among the rankings on the basis of trial quality, number of trials, or journal impact factor. Physical therapists who are trying to keep up-to-date by reading the best

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

The first three years of the Journal of Global Health: Assessing the impact

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Igor Rudan

2014-06-01

Full Text Available The Journal of Global Health (JoGH is three years old. To assess its impact, we analysed online access to JoGH’s articles using PubMed Central and Google Analytics tools. Moreover, we tracked citations that JoGH received in 2013 using ISI Web of KnowledgeSM and Google Scholar® tools. The 66 items (articles, viewpoints and editorials published between June 2011 and December 2013 were accessed more than 50 000 times during 2013, from more than 160 countries of the world. Seven among the 13 most accessed papers were focused on global, regional and national epidemiological estimates of important infectious diseases. JoGH articles published in 2011 and 2012 received 77 citations in Journal Citation Reports® (JCR–indexed journals in 2013 to 24 original research articles, setting our first, unofficial impact factor at 3.208. In addition, JoGH received 11 citations during 2013 to its 12 original research papers published during 2013, resulting in an immediacy index of 0.917. The number of external, non–commissioned submissions that we consider to be of high quality is continuously increasing, leading to current JoGH’s rejection rate of about 80%. The current citation analysis raises favourable expectations for the JoGH’s overall impact on the global health community in future years.

Randomized trials published in higher vs. lower impact journals differ in design, conduct, and analysis.

Science.gov (United States)

Bala, Malgorzata M; Akl, Elie A; Sun, Xin; Bassler, Dirk; Mertz, Dominik; Mejza, Filip; Vandvik, Per Olav; Malaga, German; Johnston, Bradley C; Dahm, Philipp; Alonso-Coello, Pablo; Diaz-Granados, Natalia; Srinathan, Sadeesh K; Hassouneh, Basil; Briel, Matthias; Busse, Jason W; You, John J; Walter, Stephen D; Altman, Douglas G; Guyatt, Gordon H

2013-03-01

To compare methodological characteristics of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in higher vs. lower impact Core Clinical Journals. We searched MEDLINE for RCTs published in 2007 in Core Clinical Journals. We randomly sampled 1,140 study reports in a 1:1 ratio in higher (five general medicine journals with the highest total citations in 2007) and lower impact journals. Four hundred sixty-nine RCTs proved eligible: 219 in higher and 250 in lower impact journals. RCTs in higher vs. lower impact journals had larger sample sizes (median, 285 vs. 39), were more likely to receive industry funding (53% vs. 28%), declare concealment of allocation (66% vs. 36%), declare blinding of health care providers (53% vs. 41%) and outcome adjudicators (72% vs. 54%), report a patient-important primary outcome (69% vs. 50%), report subgroup analyses (64% vs. 26%), prespecify subgroup hypotheses (42% vs. 20%), and report a test for interaction (54% vs. 27%); P journals were more likely to report methodological safeguards against bias and patient-important outcomes than those published in lower impact journals. However, sufficient limitations remain such that publication in a higher impact journal does not ensure low risk of bias. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

For 481 biomedical open access journals, articles are not searchable in the Directory of Open Access Journals nor in conventional biomedical databases

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Liljekvist, Mads Svane; Andresen, Kristoffer; Pommergaard, Hans-Christian

2015-01-01

biomedical databases (MEDLINE, PubMed Central, EMBASE and SCOPUS) and DOAJ were gathered. Journals were included if they were (1) actively publishing, (2) full OA, (3) prospectively indexed in one or more database, and (4) of biomedical subject. Impact factor and journal language were also collected. DOAJ...... journals, 86.7% were listed in DOAJ. Combined, the conventional biomedical databases listed 75.0% of the journals; 18.7% in MEDLINE; 36.5% in PubMed Central; 51.5% in SCOPUS and 50.6% in EMBASE. Of the journals in DOAJ, 88.7% published in English and 20.6% had received impact factor for 2012 compared...

Using network centrality measures to improve national journal classification lists

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Zuccala, A.; Robinson-Garcia, N.; Repiso, R.; Torres-Salinas, D

2016-07-01

Research productivity for the scholar is often evaluated on the basis of his/her journal articles; however, specific journals are said to possess a higher measure of impact than others(Archambault & Larivière, 2009; Garfield, 2006; Glänzel & Moed, 2002). When a scholar decides where to publish, (s)he might consider a journal’s impact factor. Although Garfield (1973) claimed that citation counts to individual articles will determine the impact factor of a journal, newer evidence points to the contrary: a journal with a high impact factor can also influence an article’s readership and subsequent citation rates (Larivière & Gingras, 2010). This “chicken-and-egg” dispute (i.e., citations first or impact first?) can be tested, but can still have negative consequences for how journals are selected, rated, listed, and used by policymakers for developing measures of scholarly performance. For instance, in countries like Denmark and Spain classified journal lists are now being produced and used in the calculation of nationwide performance indicators. As a result, Danish and Spanish scholars are advised to contribute to journals of high “authority” (as in the former) or those within a high class (as in the latter). This can create a few problems. (Author)

Ambiente & Água in the context of impact indicators of scientific Brazilian journals

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Nelson Wellausen Dias

2010-08-01

Full Text Available For quite some time the international scientific community has criticized the use of impact indicators based only on few journals registered at commercially subscribed databases such as the ISI Web of Knowledge (producer of Journal Citation Reports - JCR. Several studies focusing on different subject areas have demonstrated the advantages and disadvantages of assessing the impact of an article, or journal, from commercial and open-access databases, such as Google Scholar (Segen, 1997; Gisvold, 1999; DuBois and Reeb, 2000; Whitehouse, 2002; Baumgartner and Pieters, 2003; Cameron, 2005; Ha et al., 2006; Mingers and Harzing, 2007. Most of the studies found that there was a strong correlation between impact indicators measured by a commercial databases (restricted and open-access in certain field areas (Science, Health, Biological and Applied Social, while areas usually with lesser coverage by commercial databases (Environment, Humanities, among others end up having lower impact indicator values based on these commercial databases. Moreover, the number of publications in these last areas has shown a significant expansion recently and, therefore, they end up receiving greater impact scores when evaluated by open-access databases. In these cases the correlation between impact indicators calculated by restricted versus open-access database is significantly lower. In this exercise, developed to obtain impact values of various Brazilian scientific journals in international open-access databases, not only it could be demonstrated the role that the journal Ambiente & Água withholds in the national scientific community (and even international if considered the information published in previous editorials, but also witnesses the degree of efficiency, transparency, and simplicity of the indicators used. The Editorial Board of the journal Ambiente & Água stands in favor of using indicators that are transparent, simple, and free of charge in the process of

Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge Management

Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge Management. 55. Adeola Esther Olutoki ... The main instruments used for data collection were research ... collections in the library and enhance academic performance. ... libraries; they contain the latest information on research findings which are of great importance.

Factor analysis of sources of information on organ donation and transplantation in journalism students.

Science.gov (United States)

Martínez-Alarcón, L; Ríos, A; Ramis, G; López-Navas, A; Febrero, B; Ramírez, P; Parrilla, P

2013-01-01

Journalists and the information they disseminate are essential to promote health and organ donation and transplantation (ODT). The attitude of journalism students toward ODT could influence public opinion and help promote this treatment option. The aim of this study was to determine the media through which journalism students receive information on ODT and to analyze the association between the sources of information and psychosocial variables. We surveyed journalism students (n = 129) recruited in compulsory classes. A validated psychosocial questionnaire (self-administered, anonymous) about ODT was used. Student t test and χ(2) test were applied. Questionnaire completion rate was 98% (n = 126). The medium with the greatest incidence on students was television (TV), followed by press and magazines/books. In the factor analysis to determine the impact of the information by its source, the first factor was talks with friends and family; the second was shared by hoardings/publicity posters, health professionals, and college/school; and the third was TV and radio. In the factor analysis between information sources and psychosocial variables, the associations were between information about organ donation transmitted by friends and family and having spoken about ODT with them; by TV, radio, and hoardings and not having spoken in the family; and by TV/radio and the father's and mother's opinion about ODT. The medium with the greatest incidence on students is TV, and the medium with the greatest impact on broadcasting information was conversations with friends, family, and health professionals. This could be useful for society, because they should be provided with clear and concise information. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Evidence-based editing: factors influencing the number of citations in a national journal.

Science.gov (United States)

Ruano-Ravina, Alberto; Alvarez-Dardet, Carlos

2012-09-01

Citations received by papers published within a journal serve to increase its bibliometric impact. The objective of this paper was to assess the influence of publication language, article type, number of authors, and year of publication on the citations received by papers published in Gaceta Sanitaria, a Spanish-language journal of public health. The information sources were the journal website and the Web of Knowledge, of the Institute of Scientific Information. The period analyzed was from 2007 to 2010. We included original articles, brief original articles, and reviews published within that period. We extracted manually information regarding the variables analyzed and we also differentiated among total citations and self-citations. We constructed logistic regression models to analyze the probability of a Gaceta Sanitaria paper to be cited or not, taking into account the aforementioned independent variables. We also analyzed the probability of receiving citations from non-Spanish authors. Two hundred forty papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The included papers received a total of 287 citations, which became 202 when excluding self-citations. The only variable influencing the probability of being cited was the publication year. After excluding never cited papers, time since publication and review papers had the highest probabilities of being cited. Papers in English and review articles had a higher probability of citation from non-Spanish authors. Publication language has no influence on the citations received by a national, non-English journal. Reviews in English have the highest probability of citation from abroad. Editors should decide how to manage this information when deciding policies to raise the bibliometric impact factor of their journals. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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

Fator de impacto: importância e influência no meio editorial, acadêmico e científico Journal impact factor: its editorial, academic and scientific importance

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Milton A. Ruiz

2009-01-01

Full Text Available Neste relato os autores apresentam informações sobre os instrumentos bibliométricos e a sua importância na aferição da qualidade dos periódicos científicos, pesquisadores e docentes. Apresentam em particular a história e a implantação do fator de impacto do Institute for Scientific Information, existente desde 1955. São apresentados e discutidos as críticas referentes à inadequação do fator de impacto para avaliação da produção científica, uso indevido e estratégias editoriais de manipulação deste índice bibliométrico.É apresentada a nova classificação Capes para os periódicos, baseada em vários critérios e no Fator de Impacto, em especial, e a sua influência na vida acadêmica e científica nacional. Conclui que, apesar de todos os óbices e discussões, o Fator de Impacto do Institute for Scientific Information ainda é uma ferramenta útil e, isoladamente, a única existente para avaliar os periódicos científicos e a produtividade intelectual.In this report, the authors present information on bibliometric instruments and their importance in measuring the quality of scientific journals and researchers. They present the history and deployment of the impact factor by the Institute for Scientific Information that exists since 1955. Criticism regarding the inadequacy of the impact factor in the evaluation of scientific publications, its misuse and editorial handling strategies of this bibliometric index are presented and discussed. The new Capes classification for journals, based on various criteria and in particular the impact factor, is presented as is its influence on national scientific and academic life. The authors conclude that, despite all obstacles and discussions, the impact factor of the Institute for Scientific Information is still a useful tool and is the only one available to assess, in isolation, scientific and intellectual productivity.

Fator de impacto: importância e influência no meio editorial, acadêmico e científico Journal impact factor: this editorial, academic and scientific influence

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Milton Artur Ruiz

2009-09-01

Full Text Available Neste relato, os autores apresentam informações sobre os instrumentos bibliométricos e a sua importância na aferição da qualidade dos periódicos científicos, pesquisadores e docentes. Apresentam em particular a história e a implantação do fator de impacto do Institute for Scientific Information existente desde 1955. São apresentadas e discutidas as críticas referentes à inadequação do fator de impacto para avaliação da produção científica, uso indevido e estratégias editoriais de manipulação deste índice bibliométrico. É apresentada a nova classificação CAPES para os periódicos, baseada em vários critérios e no Fator de impacto, em especial, e a sua influência na vida acadêmica e científica nacional. Conclui que, apesar de todos os óbices e discussões, o Fator de Impacto do Institute for Scientific Information ainda é uma ferramenta útil e, isoladamente, a única existente para avaliar os periódicos científicos e a produtividade intelectualIn this report the authors present information on the bibliometric instruments and their importance in measuring the quality of scientific journals and researchers. They in particular the history and deployment of the impact factor of the existing Institute for Scientific Information since 1955. Are presented and discussed the criticism regarding the inadequacy of the impact factor for evaluation of scientific production, misuse and strategies editorial handling of the bibliometric index. It is presented to the new classification CAPES for the journals, based on various criteria and the impact factor and its influence on national scientific and academic life. The authors conclude that, despite all obstacles and discussions, the impact factor of the Institute for Scientific Information is still an useful tool and the only isolation available to assess the scientific and intellectual productivity

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

Science.gov (United States)

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

Assessing Journal Quality in Mathematics Education

Science.gov (United States)

Nivens, Ryan Andrew; Otten, Samuel

2017-01-01

In this Research Commentary, we describe 3 journal metrics--the Web of Science's Impact Factor, Scopus's SCImago Journal Rank, and Google Scholar Metrics' h5-index--and compile the rankings (if they exist) for 69 mathematics education journals. We then discuss 2 paths that the mathematics education community should consider with regard to these…

[The long pilgrimage of Spanish biomedical journals toward excellence. Who helps? Quality, impact and research merit].

Science.gov (United States)

Alfonso, Fernando

2010-03-01

Biomedical journals must adhere to strict standards of editorial quality. In a globalized academic scenario, biomedical journals must compete firstly to publish the most relevant original research and secondly to obtain the broadest possible visibility and the widest dissemination of their scientific contents. The cornerstone of the scientific process is still the peer-review system but additional quality criteria should be met. Recently access to medical information has been revolutionized by electronic editions. Bibliometric databases such as MEDLINE, the ISI Web of Science and Scopus offer comprehensive online information on medical literature. Classically, the prestige of biomedical journals has been measured by their impact factor but, recently, other indicators such as SCImago SJR or the Eigenfactor are emerging as alternative indices of a journal's quality. Assessing the scholarly impact of research and the merits of individual scientists remains a major challenge. Allocation of authorship credit also remains controversial. Furthermore, in our Kafkaesque world, we prefer to count rather than read the articles we judge. Quantitative publication metrics (research output) and citations analyses (scientific influence) are key determinants of the scientific success of individual investigators. However, academia is embracing new objective indicators (such as the "h" index) to evaluate scholarly merit. The present review discusses some editorial issues affecting biomedical journals, currently available bibliometric databases, bibliometric indices of journal quality and, finally, indicators of research performance and scientific success. Copyright 2010 SEEN. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.

Australian Education Journals: Quantitative and Qualitative Indicators

Science.gov (United States)

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…

Is open access sufficient? A review of the quality of open-access nursing journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Crowe, Marie; Carlyle, Dave

2015-02-01

The present study aims to review the quality of open-access nursing journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals that published papers in 2013 with a nursing focus, written in English, and were freely accessible. Each journal was reviewed in relation to their publisher, year of commencement, number of papers published in 2013, fee for publication, indexing, impact factor, and evidence of requirements for ethics and disclosure statements. The quality of the journals was assessed by impact factors and the requirements for indexing in PubMed. A total of 552 were published in 2013 in the 19 open-access nursing journals that met the inclusion criteria. No journals had impact factors listed in Web of Knowledge, but three had low Scopus impact factors. Only five journals were indexed with PubMed. The quality of the 19 journals included in the review was evaluated as inferior to most subscription-fee journals. Mental health nursing has some responsibility to the general public, and in particular, consumers of mental health services and their families, for the quality of papers published in open-access journals. The way forward might involve dual-platform publication or a process that enables assessment of how research has improved clinical outcomes. © 2014 Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.

Scientific impact of studies published in temporarily available radiation oncology journals: a citation analysis.

Science.gov (United States)

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

2015-01-01

The purpose of this study was to review all articles published in two temporarily available radiation oncology journals (Radiation Oncology Investigations, Journal of Radiosurgery) in order to evaluate their scientific impact. From several potential measures of impact and relevance of research, we selected article citation rate because landmark or practice-changing research is likely to be cited frequently. The citation database Scopus was used to analyse number of citations. During the time period 1996-1999 the journal Radiation Oncology Investigations published 205 articles, which achieved a median number of 6 citations (range 0-116). However, the most frequently cited article in the first 4 volumes achieved only 23 citations. The Journal of Radiosurgery published only 31 articles, all in the year 1999, which achieved a median number of 1 citation (range 0-11). No prospective randomized studies or phase I-II collaborative group trials were published in these journals. Apparently, the Journal of Radiosurgery acquired relatively few manuscripts that were interesting and important enough to impact clinical practice. Radiation Oncology Investigations' citation pattern was better and closer related to that reported in several previous studies focusing on the field of radiation oncology. The vast majority of articles published in temporarily available radiation oncology journals had limited clinical impact and achieved few citations. Highly influential research was unlikely to be submitted during the initial phase of establishing new radiation oncology journals.

The cock, the Academy, and the best scientific journal in the world.

Science.gov (United States)

Romanovsky, Andrej A

2015-01-01

The reader is invited to travel to Ancient Greece, contemporary Brazil, and other places in a fantasy search for the best scientific journal. This whimsical search does not rely on the impact factor, the most popular tool used in real life for finding good journals. Instead, it takes advantage of the so-called authority factor, a recently proposed alternative to the impact factor. The authority factor of a particular journal is the mean h-index (Hirsch's index) of the most suitable group of this journal's editors. Having no connection to any major function of scientific journals, and also being arbitrary (which group of editors to select?), this factor is poorly suited for any technical analysis, but it seems to work well for "small-talk" editorials and self-promotion by complacent editors. Interestingly, the highest authority factor we could find belongs to the journal Temperature. This claim, however, should not be taken too seriously.

Level 1 COUNTER Compliant Vendor Statistics are a Reliable Measure of Journal Usage A review of: Duy, Joanna and Liwen Vaughan. “Can Electronic Journal Usage Data Replace Citation Data as a Measure of Journal Use? An Empirical Examination.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 32.5 (Sept. 2006: 512‐17.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Gaby Haddow

2007-06-01

Full Text Available Objective – To identify valid measures of journal usage by comparing citation data with print and electronic journal use data.Design – Bibliometric study.Setting – Large academic library in Canada.Subjects – Instances of use were collected from 11 print journals of the American Chemical Society (ACS, 9 print journals ofthe Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC, and electronic journals in chemistry and biochemistry from four publishers – ACS, RSC, Elsevier, and Wiley. ACS, Elsevier, and Wiley journals in chemistry‐related subject areas were sampled for Journal Impact Factors and citations data from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI.Methods – Journal usage data were collected to determine if an association existed between: (1 print and electronic journal use; (2 electronic journal use and citations to journals by authors from the university; and (3 electronic journal use and Journal Impact Factors. Between June 2000 and September 2003, library staff recorded the re‐shelving of bound volumes and loose issues of 20 journal titles published by the ACS and the RSC.Electronic journal usage data were collected for journals published by ACS, RSC, Elsevier, and Wiley within the ISI‐defined chemistry and biochemistry subject area. Data were drawn from the publishers’ Level 1 COUNTER compliant usage statistics. These data equate 1 instance of use with a user viewing an HTML or PDF full text article. The period of data collection varied, but at least 2.5 years of data were collected for each publisher. Journal Impact Factors were collected for all ISI chemistry‐related journals published by ACS, Elsevier, and Wiley for the year 2001. Library Journal Utilization Reports (purchased from ISI were used to determine the number of times researchers at the university cited journals in the same set of chemistry‐related journals over the period 1998 to 2002. The authors call this “local citation data” (512. The results from

Modeling nonuniversal citation distributions: the role of scientific journals

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Yao, Zheng; Peng, Xiao-Long; Xu, Xin-Jian; Zhang, Li-Jie

2014-01-01

Whether a scientific paper is cited is related not only to the influence of its author(s) but also to the journal publishing it. Scientists, either proficient or less experienced, usually submit their most important work to prestigious journals which receive more citations than others. How to model the role of scientific journals in citation dynamics is of great importance. In this paper we address this issue through two approaches. One is the intrinsic heterogeneity of a paper determined by the impact factor of the journal publishing it. The other is the mechanism of a paper being cited which depends on its citations and prestige. We develop a model for citation networks via an intrinsic nodal weight function and an intuitive aging mechanism. The node’s weight is drawn from the distribution of impact factors of journals and the aging transition is a function of the citation and the prestige. The node-degree distribution of resulting networks shows nonuniversal scaling: the distribution decays exponentially for small degree and has a power-law tail for large degree, hence the dual behavior. The higher the impact factor of the journal, the larger the tipping point and the smaller the power exponent that are obtained. With the increase of the journal rank, this phenomenon will fade and evolve to pure power laws. (paper)

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.…

Characteristics of Open Access Journals in Six Subject Areas

Science.gov (United States)

Walters, William H.; Linvill, Anne C.

2011-01-01

We examine the characteristics of 663 Open Access (OA) journals in biology, computer science, economics, history, medicine, and psychology, then compare the OA journals with impact factors to comparable subscription journals. There is great variation in the size of OA journals; the largest publishes more than 2,700 articles per year, but half…

A Comparative Study of the Citation Impact of Chinese Journals with Government Priority Support

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Zhou, P.; Leydesdorff, L.

2016-01-01

In order to improve the citation impact of Chinese journals, relevant Chinese government agencies have launched a program entitled Citation Impact Upgrading Plan (CIUP) with financial support. Only a few journals that perform better have been screened out for CIUP support. This study tries to figure

JOURNAL ANALYSIS ON OPHTHALMOLOGY AND OTHERS.

Science.gov (United States)

Freitas, Denise de

2015-01-01

To update knowledge and methods to access and view the journals included in Qualis of CAPES Medicine III, and how to measure the impact factor. Document review on the attempt to verify the way Qualis uses for ranking journals cited by the post-graduate programs of Medicine III in their evaluation periods, and the impact factors obtained by journals indexing base. The classification is annual and are ranking in strata ranging from A1, the highest, and A2; B1; B2; B3; B4; B5; C. The latter has zero evaluation weight. These strata take as reference the impact factor of the journals listed by the programs. The same journal can be classified into different Qualis in other areas, and this is no inconsistency, but expressed the assigned value, in each area, at that particular journal. The Impact Factor is measured using the Journal of Citation Report in Web of Knowledge website. Using the criteria established by WebQualis for stratification of journals there is a quality guidance of what is produced by the program and, based on it, can be made scientific comparison of program performance. Consulting the JCR is recommended because it defines exactly what is the journal's impact factor; Qualis stratifies numerical intervals and not individual journal specificity. Atualização do conhecimento dos meios e métodos de acessar e visualizar os periódicos do Qualis da Medicina III da CAPES e a mensuração do Fator de Impacto. Buscou-se verificar a forma utilizada pelo Qualis para classificar os periódicos referidos pelos programas de pós-graduação da Medicina III em seus períodos de avaliação e os fatores de impacto obtidos pelas revistas em base indexadora. A classificação é anual e são enquadrados em estratos que variam de A1, o mais elevado, a A2; B1; B2; B3; B4; B5; C. Este último tem peso zero. Esses estratos levam como referência o Fator de Impacto dos periódicos referidos pelos programas. Um mesmo periódico pode ter classificação em Qualis diferentes em

Bibliometric Profile of Turkish Journal of Psychology

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Umut Al

2013-11-01

Full Text Available The Turkish Journal of Psychology has been indexed by the Social Science Citation Index since 1995. This study examines the Turkish Journal of Psychology and bibliometric features of its articles.  The research carried out covers 118 articles between the years 1995-2005.  The following research ques- tions have been addressed: 1 What are the subjects of the articles? 2 Is multi- ple authorship a prevalent feature of the articles? 3 What are the institutional affiliations of the authors of the articles? 4 What are the common characteris- tics of the cited articles? 5 Which types of sources (journal articles, mono- graphs, etc. get cited more often in the articles? 6 What are the most frequent- ly cited journals in the TJP? 7 Does the distribution of citations to journals fit Bradford's Law of Scattering? 8 Is there a relationship between the impact fac- tors of journals and the number of citations they get? 9 What is the rate of lit- erature obsolescence in psychology? 10 With regard to impact factor, what is the position of the TJP? Almost all of the articles were written in Turkish. The important part of the contributors was affiliated with Hacettepe, Ankara and the Middle East Technical universities. This research showed that 57% of articles (67 articles published in Turkish Journal of Psychology received no citations remaining 43% (51 articles were cited 135 times. The author self-citation ratio was 34%. In addition, journal self-citation ratio was 41%. Journals received 69% of all cita- tions in the Turkish Journal of Psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Turkish Journal of Psychology, Child Development, Developmental Psychology and Psychological Bulletin were among the most frequently cited journals. Articles that appeared in the top 18 journals received 33% of all citations. The half-life of sources cited in the Turkish Journal of Psychology was ten years. According to the impact factor rank, the Turkish Journal of

Conflicts of interest at medical journals: the influence of industry-supported randomised trials on journal impact factors and revenue - cohort study

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Lundh, Andreas; Barbateskovic, Marija; Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn

2010-01-01

transparency in reporting of conflict of interest is an increasingly important aspect of publication in medical journals. Publication of large industry-supported trials may generate many citations and journal income through reprint sales and thereby be a source of conflicts of interest for journals...

Risk of bias assessment of randomised controlled trials in high-impact ophthalmology journals and general medical journals: a systematic review.

Science.gov (United States)

Joksimovic, Lazar; Koucheki, Robert; Popovic, Marko; Ahmed, Yusuf; Schlenker, Matthew B; Ahmed, Iqbal Ike K

2017-10-01

Evidence-based treatments in ophthalmology are often based on the results of randomised controlled trials. Biased conclusions from randomised controlled trials may lead to inappropriate management recommendations. This systematic review investigates the prevalence of bias risk in randomised controlled trials published in high-impact ophthalmology journals and ophthalmology trials from general medical journals. Using Ovid MEDLINE, randomised controlled trials in the top 10 high-impact ophthalmology journals in 2015 were systematically identified and critically appraised for the prevalence of bias risk. Included randomised controlled trials were assessed in all domains of bias as defined by the Cochrane Collaboration. In addition, the prevalence of conflict of interest and industry sponsorship was investigated. A comparison with ophthalmology articles from high-impact general medical journals was performed. Of the 259 records that were screened from ophthalmology-specific journals, 119 trials met all inclusion criteria and were critically appraised. In total, 29.4% of domains had an unclear risk, 13.8% had a high risk and 56.8% had a low risk of bias. In comparison, ophthalmology articles from general medical journals had a lower prevalence of unclear risk (17.1%), higher prevalence of high risk (21.9%) and a higher prevalence of low risk domains (61.9%). Furthermore, 64.7% of critically appraised trials from ophthalmology-specific journals did not report any conflicts of interest, while 70.6% did not report an industry sponsor of their trial. In closing, it is essential that authors, peer reviewers and readers closely follow published risk of bias guidelines. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

[The impact of the annual scientific meetings of the Israel Society of Rheumatology as measured by publication rates of the abstracts in peer-reviewed journals].

Science.gov (United States)

Perez, Shira; Hashkes, Philip J; Uziel, Yosef

2004-04-01

We aimed to examine the impact and quality of the research presented in the Israel Society of Rheumatology (ISR) annual scientific meetings by measuring publication rates of the abstracts in peer-reviewed journals and investigating the factors that influenced publication. We examined the outcome of all 79 abstracts submitted to the ISR for the 1998-2000 annual meetings. A MEDLINE search of all abstracts, by authors, topics and keywords was performed. Senior authors of abstracts not found to be published in this search were interviewed regarding publication and factors influencing submission. We described the effect of variable factors on the rate of publication. As of September 2002, 63 (80%) abstracts were published in peer-reviewed journals or are currently in-press. Most abstracts were published in prominent journals (with a high impact factor). The majority of the abstracts (61%) were published in rheumatologic journals, 65% of the studies originated from tertiary centers and 19% of the studies were multicenter. The most common diseases studied were antiphospholipid syndrome (20%), systemic lupus erythematosus (19%) and inflammatory arthritis (18%). Most of the studies were of disease pathogenesis (35%) and clinical manifestations (33%). The most common study designs were basic science (34%). An overall 57% of the studies reported "positive" results and 9% reported "negative" results. None of the factors studied were associated with publication or non-publication. The main cause cited by authors for not publishing their abstract was lack of time to prepare a full paper or a desire to further expand the study. Within this group of 16 authors of abstracts, 11 authors still plan to submit a paper. The ISR annual meetings have an important clinical scientific impact as measured by the high rate of abstracts published as full length articles in leading peer-reviewed journals.

ResearchGate is no longer reliable: leniency towards ghost journals may decrease its impact on the scientific community.

Science.gov (United States)

Memon, Aamir Raoof

2016-12-01

ResearchGate has been regarded as one of the most attractive academic social networking site for scientific community. It has been trying to improve user-centered interfaces to gain more attractiveness to scientists around the world. Display of journal related scietometric measures (such as impact factor, 5-year impact, cited half-life, eigenfactor) is an important feature in ResearchGate. Open access publishing has added more to increased visibility of research work and easy access to information related to research. Moreover, scientific community has been much interested in promoting their work and exhibiting its impact to others through reliable scientometric measures. However, with the growing market of publications and improvements in the field of research, this community has been victimized by the cybercrime in the form of ghost journals, fake publishers and magical impact measures. Particularly, ResearchGate more recently, has been lenient in its policies against this dark side of academic writing. Therefore, this communication aims to discuss concerns associated with leniency in ResearchGate policies and its impact of scientific community.

Support Science by Publishing in Scientific Society Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Schloss, Patrick D; Johnston, Mark; Casadevall, Arturo

2017-09-26

Scientific societies provide numerous services to the scientific enterprise, including convening meetings, publishing journals, developing scientific programs, advocating for science, promoting education, providing cohesion and direction for the discipline, and more. For most scientific societies, publishing provides revenues that support these important activities. In recent decades, the proportion of papers on microbiology published in scientific society journals has declined. This is largely due to two competing pressures: authors' drive to publish in "glam journals"-those with high journal impact factors-and the availability of "mega journals," which offer speedy publication of articles regardless of their potential impact. The decline in submissions to scientific society journals and the lack of enthusiasm on the part of many scientists to publish in them should be matters of serious concern to all scientists because they impact the service that scientific societies can provide to their members and to science. Copyright © 2017 Schloss et al.

A systematic assessment of Cochrane reviews and systematic reviews published in high-impact medical journals related to cancer.

Science.gov (United States)

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

Public availability of research data in dentistry journals indexed in Journal Citation Reports.

Science.gov (United States)

Vidal-Infer, Antonio; Tarazona, Beatriz; Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo; Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael

2018-01-01

Dentistry is a medical discipline with an increasing scientific production in the last years. Due to the importance of data sharing in science, this study aims at analyzing the availability of raw data in articles from scientific journals indexed in the Dentistry category of the 2014 edition of the Journal Citation Reports. A review of the 88 websites of journals from the Dentistry category was conducted to determine the data-sharing editorial policies. Furthermore, a search in the PubMed Central repository to collect information about the characteristics of the supplementary material of articles from those journals was carried out. The possibility of publishing a supplementary material was higher in the first quartile journals. A percentage of 7.6% of the articles registered in PubMed Central contained a supplementary material, especially text documents, but the presence of spreadsheets was scarce. There is a relationship between openness policies and the impact of the journals according to their quartile or position ranking by the impact factor in the JCR, but the willingness of sharing raw data in spreadsheets format is still limited. This study will reveal the resources of raw data which will improve quality of research and clinical practice.

An assessment of South Africa's research journals: Impact factors, Eigenfactors and structure of editorial boards

OpenAIRE

Androniki E.M. Pouris; Anastassios Pouris

2015-01-01

Scientific journals play an important role in academic information exchange and their assessment is of interest to science authorities, editors and researchers. The assessment of journals is of particular interest to South African authorities as the country's universities are partially funded according to the number of publications they produce in accredited journals, such as the Thomson Reuters indexed journals. Scientific publishing in South Africa has experienced a revolution during the la...

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

Science.gov (United States)

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 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.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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 (Pjournals of ophthalmology still are low when compared with the foreign journals of ophthalmology with highest Impact Factor®.

Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals: a cross sectional survey.

Science.gov (United States)

Wislar, Joseph S; Flanagin, Annette; Fontanarosa, Phil B; Deangelis, Catherine D

2011-10-25

To assess the prevalence of honorary and ghost authors in six leading general medical journals in 2008 and compare this with the prevalence reported by authors of articles published in 1996. Cross sectional survey using a web based questionnaire. International survey of journal authors. Sample of corresponding authors of 896 research articles, review articles, and editorial/opinion articles published in six general medical journals with high impact factors in 2008: Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA, Lancet, Nature Medicine, New England Journal of Medicine, and PLoS Medicine. Self reported compliance with International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship for all authors on the selected articles. A total of 630/896 (70.3%) corresponding authors responded to the survey. The prevalence of articles with honorary authorship or ghost authorship, or both, was 21.0% (95% CI 18.0% to 24.3%), a decrease from 29.2% reported in 1996 (P = 0.004). Based on 545 responses on honorary authorship, 96 articles (17.6% (95% CI 14.6% to 21.0%)) had honorary authors (range by journal 12.2% to 29.3%), a non-significant change from 1996 (19.3%; P = 0.439). Based on 622 responses on ghost authorship, 49 articles (7.9% (6.0% to 10.3%)) had ghost authors (range by journal 2.1% to 11.0%), a significant decline from 1996 (11.5%; P = 0.023). The prevalence of honorary authorship was 25.0% in original research reports, 15.0% in reviews, and 11.2% in editorials, whereas the prevalence of ghost authorship was 11.9% in research articles, 6.0% in reviews, and 5.3% in editorials. Evidence of honorary and ghost authorship in 21% of articles published in major medical journals in 2008 suggests that increased efforts by scientific journals, individual authors, and academic institutions are essential to promote responsibility, accountability, and transparency in authorship, and to maintain integrity in scientific publication.

The journal impact factor as a parameter for the evaluation of researchers and research El factor de impacto de las revistas como parámetro para la evaluacion de investigadores e investigaciones

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

K.-F. Kaltenborn

2004-07-01

Full Text Available The journal impact factor (IF, which is published annually by the Institute for Scientific Information® (USA, is meanwhile in widespread use as a scientometric parameter for the evaluation of research and researchers in Germany and other European countries. The present article subjects the IF to critical analysis. It first deals with processes of production, transfer, and use of medical knowledge, because the IF intervenes in these processes on account of its reflexivity. Secondary effects of the IF resulting from its reflexivity are discussed with the focus on the level of the author, the journal and the medical discipline as well as on social knowledge processes in society. In addition, the extent to which the IF is appropriate for evaluating the quality of a specific article, of a journal or of individual and collective research achievements is discussed. The present article calls for a research evaluation in accordance with the recommendations of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Council, DFG and of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizini-schen Fachgesellschaften (Association of the Scientific Medical Societies, AWMF; and b for more intensive occupation with and organization of medical knowledge processes.El factor de impacto de las revistas (journal impact factor - IF, que publica anualmente el Institute for Scientific Information® (EE.UU., se emplea generalizadamente como parámetro cienciométrico para evaluar las investigaciones y a los investigadores en Alemania y otros países europeos. El presente artículo somete al IF a un análisis crítico. Primero trata de los procesos de producción, comunicación y empleo del conocimiento médico, pues el IF interviene en estos procesos en virtud de su reflexividad. Se exponen los efectos secundarios del IF, que surgen de esta reflexividad, centrándose en el nivel del autor, de la revista y de la disciplina médica, así como en los procesos de conocimiento

WE-E-204-01: ASTRO Based Journals

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Klein, E. [Long Island Jewish Medical Center (United States)

2016-06-15

Research papers authored by Medical Physicists address a large spectrum of oncologic, imaging, or basic research problems; exploit a wide range of physical and engineering methodologies; and often describe the efforts of a multidisciplinary research team. Given dozens of competing journals accepting medical physics articles, it may not be clear to an individual author which journal is the best venue for disseminating their work to the scientific community. Relevant factors usually include the Journal’s audience and scientific impact, but also such factors as perceived acceptance rate, interest in their topic, and quality of service. The purpose of this symposium is to provide the medical physics community with an overview of scope, review processes, and article guidelines for the following journals: Radiology, Medical Physics, International Journal of Radiation Biology and Physics, Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, and Practical Radiation Oncology. Senior members of the editorial board for each journal will provide details as to the journals review process, for example: single blind versus double blind reviews; open access policies, the hierarchy of the review process in terms of editorial board structure; the reality of acceptance, in terms of acceptance rate; and the types of research the journal prefers to publish. Other journals will be discussed as well. The goal is to provide for authors guidance before they begin to write their papers, not only for proper formatting, but also that the readership is appropriate for the particular paper, hopefully increasing the quality and impact of the paper and the likelihood of publication. Learning Objectives: To review each Journal’s submission and review process Guidance as to how to increase quality, impact and chances of acceptance To help decipher which journal is appropriate for a given work A. Karellas, Research collaboration with Koning, Corporation.

WE-E-204-01: ASTRO Based Journals

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Klein, E.

2016-01-01

Research papers authored by Medical Physicists address a large spectrum of oncologic, imaging, or basic research problems; exploit a wide range of physical and engineering methodologies; and often describe the efforts of a multidisciplinary research team. Given dozens of competing journals accepting medical physics articles, it may not be clear to an individual author which journal is the best venue for disseminating their work to the scientific community. Relevant factors usually include the Journal’s audience and scientific impact, but also such factors as perceived acceptance rate, interest in their topic, and quality of service. The purpose of this symposium is to provide the medical physics community with an overview of scope, review processes, and article guidelines for the following journals: Radiology, Medical Physics, International Journal of Radiation Biology and Physics, Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, and Practical Radiation Oncology. Senior members of the editorial board for each journal will provide details as to the journals review process, for example: single blind versus double blind reviews; open access policies, the hierarchy of the review process in terms of editorial board structure; the reality of acceptance, in terms of acceptance rate; and the types of research the journal prefers to publish. Other journals will be discussed as well. The goal is to provide for authors guidance before they begin to write their papers, not only for proper formatting, but also that the readership is appropriate for the particular paper, hopefully increasing the quality and impact of the paper and the likelihood of publication. Learning Objectives: To review each Journal’s submission and review process Guidance as to how to increase quality, impact and chances of acceptance To help decipher which journal is appropriate for a given work A. Karellas, Research collaboration with Koning, Corporation.

African Journals Online: Egypt, Arab Rep.

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Items 1 - 14 of 14 ... AFRICAN JOURNALS ONLINE (AJOL) · Journals · Advanced Search · USING AJOL · RESOURCES .... All papers are reviewed by at least one or two Egyptian referees, and then by ... Our aim was always to get an Impact Factor, but now under the ... Covered in the abstract and citation database Scopus®.

A 10-year performance trajectory of top nutrition journals′ impact factors

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Narges Jani

2012-01-01

Full Text Available Background and Aim: This study was performed to evaluate the impact factors (IFs and total citations of ISI-indexed nutrition journals in a 10-year period from 1999 to 2008 in order to assess the quality of nutrition journals. Materials and Methods: For this retrospective study, the IF and total citation data from 1998 to 2008 were collected through Journal Citation Reports of Thomson Scientific Corporation Web of Knowledge. We selected five highly cited journals in the "nutrition and dietetics" category for our analysis. These journals include Annual Reviews in Nutrition (ANNU REV NUTR, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (AJCN, Progress in Lipid Research (PROG LIPID RES, Journal of Nutrition (J NUTR, and International Journal of Obesity (INT J OBESITY Results: All five selected journals were ranked as one of the top ten "nutrition and dietetics" journals between 1999 and 2008 in ISI database. Most of selected journals′ IF had an upward trend during the 10-year period with fluctuation in some cases. AJCN consistently received the greatest number of total citations during the study period, although its IF was not the highest among the five journals studied. Conclusion: The IF illustrated changes in relative rankings of five highly cited journals included in the "nutrition and dietetics" category of the Web of Knowledge. Rank according to the absolute number of citations received, however, did not correlate with rank according to IF.

How to Rank Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Media Coverage, Journal Press Releases and Editorials Associated with Randomized and Observational Studies in High-Impact Medical Journals: A Cohort Study.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Michael T M Wang

Full Text Available Publication of clinical research findings in prominent journals influences health beliefs and medical practice, in part by engendering news coverage. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs should be most influential in guiding clinical practice. We determined whether study design of clinical research published in high-impact journals influences media coverage.We compared the incidence and amount of media coverage of RCTs with that of observational studies published in the top 7 medical journals between 1 January 2013 and 31 March 2013. We specifically assessed media coverage of the most rigorous RCTs, those with >1000 participants that reported 'hard' outcomes. There was no difference between RCTs and observational studies in coverage by major newspapers or news agencies, or in total number of news stories generated (all P>0.63. Large RCTs reporting 'hard' outcomes did not generate more news coverage than small RCTs that reported surrogate outcomes and observational studies (all P>0.32. RCTs were more likely than observational studies to attract a journal editorial (70% vs 46%, P = 0.003, but less likely to be the subject of a journal press release (17% vs 50%, P0.99, nor were they more likely to be the subject of a journal press release (14% vs 38%, P = 0.14.The design of clinical studies whose results are published in high-impact medical journals is not associated with the likelihood or amount of ensuing news coverage.

Current biomedical scientific impact (2013) of institutions, academic journals and researchers in the Republic of Macedonia.

Science.gov (United States)

Spiroski, Mirko

2014-01-01

To analyse current ranking (2013) of institutions, journals and researchers in the Republic of Macedonia. the country rankings of R. Macedonia were analyzed with SCImago Country & Journal Rank (SJR) for subject area Medicine in the years 1996-2013, and ordered by H-index. SCImago Institutions Rankings for 2013 was used for the scientific impact of biomedical institutions in the Republic of Macedonia. Journal metrics from Elsevier for the Macedonian scholarly journals for the period 2009-2013 were performed. Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), the Impact per Publication (IPP), and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) were analysed. Macedonian scholarly biomedical journals included in Google Scholar metrics (2013, 2012) were analysed with h5-index and h5-median (June 2014). A semantic analysis of the PubMed database was performed with GoPubMed on November 2, 2014 in order to identify published papers from the field of biomedical sciences affiliated with the country of Macedonia. Harzing's Publish or Perish software was used for author impact analysis and the calculation of the Hirsh-index based on Google Scholar query. The rank of subject area Medicine of R. Macedonia according to the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) is 110th in the world and 17th in Eastern Europe. Of 20 universities in Macedonia, only Ss Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, and the University St Clement of Ohrid, Bitola, are listed in the SCImago Institutions Rankings (SIR) for 2013. A very small number of Macedonian scholarly journals is included in Web of Sciences (2), PubMed (1), PubMed Central (1), SCOPUS (6), SCImago (6), and Google Scholar metrics (6). The rank of Hirsh index (h-index) was different from the rank of number of abstracts indexed in PubMed for the top 20 authors from R. Macedonia. The current biomedical scientific impact (2013) of institutions, academic journals and researchers in R. Macedonia is very low. There is an urgent need for organized measures to improve the quality

Osteopathic Emergency Medicine Programs Infrequently Publish in High-Impact Emergency Medicine Journals

OpenAIRE

Baskin, Sean M; Lin, Christina; Carlson, Jestin N

2014-01-01

Introduction: Both the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) require core faculty to engage in scholarly work, including publication in peer-reviewed journals. With the ACGME/AOA merger, we sought to evaluate the frequency of publication in high-impact peer-reviewed EM journals from authors affiliated with osteopathic emergency medicine (EM) programs. Methods: We performed a retrospective literature re...

The Impact of Different Types of Journaling Techniques on EFL Learners’ Self-Efficacy

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Sasan Baleghizadeh

2014-04-01

Full Text Available This article reports on an investigation of the impact of different methods of journaling on self-efficacy of learners of English as a foreign language. Sixty upper-intermediate Iranian English language learners were randomly assigned to three experimental conditions, namely no-feedback, teacher-feedback, and peer-feedback, and one control group—no-journal condition. The no-feedback condition learners kept reflective journals but could not share their reflective notes with other learners or their teacher, while the teacher-feedback condition learners used collaborative reflective journals with their teacher. The peer-feedback condition learners shared collaborative reflective journals with their peers, and the no-journal condition learners did not use reflective journals throughout the treatment period. An analysis of variance showed that the students with the two feedback conditions seemed to have gained a higher self-efficacy at the end of the treatment period.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

WE-E-204-03: Radiology and Other Imaging Journals

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Karellas, A.

2016-01-01

Research papers authored by Medical Physicists address a large spectrum of oncologic, imaging, or basic research problems; exploit a wide range of physical and engineering methodologies; and often describe the efforts of a multidisciplinary research team. Given dozens of competing journals accepting medical physics articles, it may not be clear to an individual author which journal is the best venue for disseminating their work to the scientific community. Relevant factors usually include the Journal’s audience and scientific impact, but also such factors as perceived acceptance rate, interest in their topic, and quality of service. The purpose of this symposium is to provide the medical physics community with an overview of scope, review processes, and article guidelines for the following journals: Radiology, Medical Physics, International Journal of Radiation Biology and Physics, Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, and Practical Radiation Oncology. Senior members of the editorial board for each journal will provide details as to the journals review process, for example: single blind versus double blind reviews; open access policies, the hierarchy of the review process in terms of editorial board structure; the reality of acceptance, in terms of acceptance rate; and the types of research the journal prefers to publish. Other journals will be discussed as well. The goal is to provide for authors guidance before they begin to write their papers, not only for proper formatting, but also that the readership is appropriate for the particular paper, hopefully increasing the quality and impact of the paper and the likelihood of publication. Learning Objectives: To review each Journal’s submission and review process Guidance as to how to increase quality, impact and chances of acceptance To help decipher which journal is appropriate for a given work A. Karellas, Research collaboration with Koning, Corporation.

WE-E-204-03: Radiology and Other Imaging Journals

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Karellas, A. [University of Massachusetts Medical School (United States)

2016-06-15

Research papers authored by Medical Physicists address a large spectrum of oncologic, imaging, or basic research problems; exploit a wide range of physical and engineering methodologies; and often describe the efforts of a multidisciplinary research team. Given dozens of competing journals accepting medical physics articles, it may not be clear to an individual author which journal is the best venue for disseminating their work to the scientific community. Relevant factors usually include the Journal’s audience and scientific impact, but also such factors as perceived acceptance rate, interest in their topic, and quality of service. The purpose of this symposium is to provide the medical physics community with an overview of scope, review processes, and article guidelines for the following journals: Radiology, Medical Physics, International Journal of Radiation Biology and Physics, Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, and Practical Radiation Oncology. Senior members of the editorial board for each journal will provide details as to the journals review process, for example: single blind versus double blind reviews; open access policies, the hierarchy of the review process in terms of editorial board structure; the reality of acceptance, in terms of acceptance rate; and the types of research the journal prefers to publish. Other journals will be discussed as well. The goal is to provide for authors guidance before they begin to write their papers, not only for proper formatting, but also that the readership is appropriate for the particular paper, hopefully increasing the quality and impact of the paper and the likelihood of publication. Learning Objectives: To review each Journal’s submission and review process Guidance as to how to increase quality, impact and chances of acceptance To help decipher which journal is appropriate for a given work A. Karellas, Research collaboration with Koning, Corporation.

Longitudinal Trends in Internationalisation, Collaboration Types, and Citation Impact: A Bibliometric Analysis of Seven LIS Journals (1980-2008

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Sei-Ching Joanna Sin

2011-06-01

Full Text Available Journal publication is a core avenue for sharing research in the LIS field. Effective scholarly communication is beneficial to the growth of a discipline. Bibliometrics research shows that articles in prestigious international journals are predominantly those of authors based in a few nations, however. Papers from authors outside the established nations are likely to be cited less often. This study analysed the longitudinal changes in geographical patterns of authorship, collaboration types, and factors affecting the citation impact of seven top LIS journals over a period of 29 years. In addition to data from all nations, this paper includes specific findings relating to Asian countries. Analysis of 8,140 papers shows that the internationalisation level in the sample set has increased in terms of number of nations represented and in a decreasing Gini coefficient. The presence of Asian nations such as Taiwan and Singapore as top contributing countries is particularly notable in the past 10 years. Domestic collaboration is found to be the dominant type of authorship pattern. In terms of citation impact as measured by citation counts, logistic regression was used to test the effects of author continent, country income level, collaboration type, publication year, and number of authors. Papers from lower-income countries or from Asian or European authors are found less likely to be ‘more cited.’ International and domestic collaboration had a positive relation with citation counts. A practical implication is that authors may consider international collaboration as a way to increase the visibility and impact of their research. Nevertheless, the reasons behind such differential citation impact require more exploration. Invisible colleges, the strengths of weak ties, and the geographic scope of a paper are some factors to be further examined. It is hoped that more research can help identify and overcome barriers in scholarly communication so as to

Citation Analysis of the Korean Journal of Urology From Web of Science, Scopus, Korean Medical Citation Index, KoreaMed Synapse, and Google Scholar.

Science.gov (United States)

Huh, Sun

2013-04-01

The Korean Journal of Urology began to be published exclusively in English in 2010 and is indexed in PubMed Central/PubMed. This study analyzed a variety of citation indicators of the Korean Journal of Urology before and after 2010 to clarify the present position of the journal among the urology category journals. The impact factor, SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), impact index, Z-impact factor (ZIF, impact factor excluding self-citation), and Hirsch Index (H-index) were referenced or calculated from Web of Science, Scopus, SCImago Journal & Country Ranking, Korean Medical Citation Index (KoMCI), KoreaMed Synapse, and Google Scholar. Both the impact factor and the total citations rose rapidly beginning in 2011. The 2012 impact factor corresponded to the upper 84.9% in the nephrology-urology category, whereas the 2011 SJR was in the upper 58.5%. The ZIF in KoMCI was one fifth of the impact factor because there are only two other urology journals in KoMCI. Up to 2009, more than half of the citations in the Web of Science were from Korean researchers, but from 2010 to 2012, more than 85% of the citations were from international researchers. The H-indexes from Web of Science, Scopus, KoMCI, KoreaMed Synapse, and Google Scholar were 8, 10, 12, 9, and 18, respectively. The strategy of the language change in 2010 was successful from the perspective of citation indicators. The values of the citation indicators will continue to increase rapidly and consistently as the research achievement of authors of the Korean Journal of Urology increases.

What are the personal and professional characteristics that distinguish the researchers who publish in high- and low-impact journals? A multi-national web-based survey.

Science.gov (United States)

Paiva, Carlos Eduardo; Araujo, Raphael L C; Paiva, Bianca Sakamoto Ribeiro; de Pádua Souza, Cristiano; Cárcano, Flavio Mavignier; Costa, Marina Moreira; Serrano, Sérgio Vicente; Lima, João Paulo Nogueira

2017-01-01

This study identifies the personal and professional profiles of researchers with a greater potential to publish high-impact academic articles. The study involved conducting an international survey of journal authors using a web-based questionnaire. The survey examined personal characteristics, funding, and the perceived barriers of research quality, work-life balance, and satisfaction and motivation in relation to career. The processes of manuscript writing and journal publication were measured using an online questionnaire that was developed for this study. The responses were compared between the two groups of researchers using logistic regression models. A total of 269 questionnaires were analysed. The researchers shared some common perceptions; both groups reported that they were seeking recognition (or to be leaders in their areas) rather than financial remuneration. Furthermore, both groups identified time and funding constraints as the main obstacles to their scientific activities. The amount of time that was spent on research activities, having >5 graduate students under supervision, never using text editing services prior to the publication of articles, and living in a developed and English-speaking country were the independent variables that were associated with their article getting a greater chance of publishing in a high-impact journal. In contrast, using one's own resources to perform studies decreased the chance of publishing in high-impact journals. The researchers who publish in high-impact journals have distinct profiles compared with the researchers who publish in low-impact journals. English language abilities and the actual amount of time that is dedicated to research and scientific writing, as well as aspects that relate to the availability of financial resources are the factors that are associated with a successful researcher's profile.

Communication Research. Bibliometric analysis of the most-cited ISI-indexed Journals

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ana Almansa-Martínez

2012-01-01

Full Text Available This article examines some of the most common methodological problems in the evaluation of academic journals in the field of communication, based on the content analysis of the ten journals with the highest impact factors in the Social Sciences Citation Index. The analysis focuses on establishing the academic and research origins and links of the authors of the articles published by these scientific publications, as well as the most predominant subject matters, genres and methodologies among the articles of these publications. This research aims to achieve two objectives: On the one hand, to analyse the role of the evaluation of communication journals in the assessment of research, which will allow us to show the difficulties of applying the bibliometric methods used by Thomson Scientific to determine the impact of journals and, on the other hand, to establish a development framework for those Spanish communication journals that meet some of the requirements of the Social Sciences Citation Index but are not yet indexed in it, either because their impact factor is still low or because of their lack of international dissemination. This research has been financed by the University of Malaga’s Research Institute for Public Relations.

[Impact factors and bibliometrics of science. Does pure science really exist?].

Science.gov (United States)

Sochman, J; Belán, A

2003-01-01

The impact factor is an artificially created indicator which when applied separately does not achieve the value attributed to it. In its assessment a number of different influences are projected which cause partial mistakes with a cumulative effect. It can have an even worse effect if the impact factor is incorrectly conceived or inadequately handled. Only in a long-term review using specific corrections it can serve to determine really top class periodicals but only within the framework of a single scientific discipline. It is not suitable for comparison of interdisciplinary journals. It should be used very carefully in the evaluation of authors. However it is still used in various types of administrative management. From the submitted paper it may seen that with a certain amount of overstatement it is personified and acts on its own. Its personification is homo sapiens scientometricus who evaluates himself as well as his environment which is represented by mere homo sapiens scientificus. In addition to the impact factor the authors discuss also other indicators and some aspects of scientometry.

ANALYSIS OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, ORTHOPEDICS AND THORACIC SURGERY JOURNALS.

Science.gov (United States)

Lima, Wilma Terezinha Anselmo

2015-01-01

To perform an extensive analysis of journals in Medicine III - CAPES, and specifically those in the areas of Otorhinolaryngology, Orthopedics and Traumatology and Chest Surgery. An active search for the impact factors in the Journal Citation Reports, Scimago, their indexation in Scielo, Lilacs, Scopus and Google Scholar, and their stratification in WebQualis was done. Forty-four journals with measured impact factors ranging from 3.006 to 0.128 were detected in the area of Otorhinolaryngology; however, only 26 of them (60%) had a Qualis measured by CAPES; in the stratification, no journal was detected in A1, three were A2 and nine B1. Three journals were located for Chest Surgery, with only one of them having a measured Qualis (A2) with a mean of 3.61. Sixty-seven journals were detected for Orthopedics and Traumatology, with an impact factor ranging from 4.699 to 0.156; Qualis was measured in only 38 of them (60%); there were three journal stratified as A1, seven as A2 and 25 as B1. The search for journals of higher impact induces authors to not publish in journals related to their area and facing more difficulties than investigators from other areas. Realizar análise ampla dos periódicos da Medicina III - CAPES e, especificamente, os pertencentes à Otorrinolaringologia, Ortopedia e Traumatologia, e Cirurgia Torácica. Busca ativa do fator de impacto dos periódicos das áreas citadas no Journal Citation Report e Scimago, sua indexação no Scielo, Lilacs, Scopus, Google Scholar e sua estratificação no WebQualis. Para a Otorrinolaringologia foram encontrados 44 periódicos, cujo fator de impacto variou de 3.006 a 0.128; entretanto, apenas 26 deles (60%) tinham Qualis medido pela CAPES; nas estratificações encontrou-se nenhuma revista em A1, três em A2 e nove em B1. Para a Cirurgia Torácica foram localizados três periódicos, sendo que apenas um tinha Qualis medido (A2) com média de 3.61. Os resultados da busca para a Ortopedia e Traumatologia permitiu

New COSPAR space life sciences journal

Czech Academy of Sciences Publication Activity Database

Laštovička, Jan; Hei, T.; Stoop, J.

2013-01-01

Roč. 52, č. 11 (2013), s. 1859 ISSN 0273-1177 Institutional support: RVO:68378289 Keywords : COSPAR journal Subject RIV: DG - Athmosphere Sciences, Meteorology Impact factor: 1.238, year: 2013 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273117713006753

Retracted Publications in the Biomedical Literature from Open Access Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Wang, Tao; Xing, Qin-Rui; Wang, Hui; Chen, Wei

2018-03-07

The number of articles published in open access journals (OAJs) has increased dramatically in recent years. Simultaneously, the quality of publications in these journals has been called into question. Few studies have explored the retraction rate from OAJs. The purpose of the current study was to determine the reasons for retractions of articles from OAJs in biomedical research. The Medline database was searched through PubMed to identify retracted publications in OAJs. The journals were identified by the Directory of Open Access Journals. Data were extracted from each retracted article, including the time from publication to retraction, causes, journal impact factor, and country of origin. Trends in the characteristics related to retraction were determined. Data from 621 retracted studies were included in the analysis. The number and rate of retractions have increased since 2010. The most common reasons for retraction are errors (148), plagiarism (142), duplicate publication (101), fraud/suspected fraud (98) and invalid peer review (93). The number of retracted articles from OAJs has been steadily increasing. Misconduct was the primary reason for retraction. The majority of retracted articles were from journals with low impact factors and authored by researchers from China, India, Iran, and the USA.

The gender gap in high-impact psychiatry journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Amering, Michaela; Schrank, Beate; Sibitz, Ingrid

2011-08-01

The number of women in medicine generally and in psychiatry specifically has increased considerably during the past 40 years, but the lack of advancement of women in academic medicine is still concerning. This study explores the changes in female authorship patterns in three high-impact general psychiatric journals. The authors categorized articles published in 1994 and 2007 by the Archives of General Psychiatry, The American Journal of Psychiatry, and The British Journal of Psychiatry according to the characteristics of the psychiatric research and the gender of each author for all articles. Overall, the percentage of female authors increased from 24.6% in 1994 to 33.6% in 2007. The authors found the greatest increases in the percentages of female authors in the areas most relevant to an academic career-first authorship (from 17.1% in 1994 to 35.3% in 2007) and original research articles (from 18.4% in 1994 to 42.7% in 2007)-and in articles on the topic with the most growth over the same time frame-neuroimaging (from 14.7% in 1994 to 43.2% in 2007). The percentages of female authors of editorials rose from only 13.5% in 1994 to 26.2% in 2007. In 2007, women made up only 25% of the editorial boards of the journals under study (up from 16% in 1994). Despite considerable gains, women still are underrepresented in academic psychiatry, including in leadership positions. Ongoing efforts and interventions are required to promote further advances and gender equity.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Scientific journals in the SciELO database, indicators of impact and the relative position of Ambiente & Água

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Nelson Wellausen Dias

2010-12-01

Full Text Available This editorial describes the process of periodic evaluation by CAPES, based on commercial indices proposed by companies such as the ISI FI by Thomson Reuters and SCImago by Scopus and public indices as proposed by SciELO and other freely calculated indices based on Google Scholar and investigates the impact position of the journal Ambiente & Agua compared with journals from the SciELO base. Results show that Ambiente & Agua is in the right path in the search for quality. Its editorial board strongly recommends that Brazilian public scientific agencies consider tools that are cost free and have large coverage for impact evaluation to allow the impact assessment of a range of emerging journals in a common and wide basis for all scientific journals.

Reporting quality of randomised controlled trial abstracts among high-impact general medical journals: a review and analysis.

Science.gov (United States)

Hays, Meredith; Andrews, Mary; Wilson, Ramey; Callender, David; O'Malley, Patrick G; Douglas, Kevin

2016-07-28

The aim of this study was to assess adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) for Abstracts by five high-impact general medical journals and to assess whether the quality of reporting was homogeneous across these journals. This is a descriptive, cross-sectional study. Randomised controlled trial (RCT) abstracts in five high-impact general medical journals. We used up to 100 RCT abstracts published between 2011 and 2014 from each of the following journals: The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), the Annals of Internal Medicine (Annals IM), The Lancet, the British Medical Journal (The BMJ) and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). The primary outcome was per cent overall adherence to the 19-item CONSORT for Abstracts checklist. Secondary outcomes included per cent adherence in checklist subcategories and assessing homogeneity of reporting quality across the individual journals. Search results yielded 466 abstracts, 3 of which were later excluded as they were not RCTs. Analysis was performed on 463 abstracts (97 from NEJM, 66 from Annals IM, 100 from The Lancet, 100 from The BMJ, 100 from JAMA). Analysis of all scored items showed an overall adherence of 67% (95% CI 66% to 68%) to the CONSORT for Abstracts checklist. The Lancet had the highest overall adherence rate (78%; 95% CI 76% to 80%), whereas NEJM had the lowest (55%; 95% CI 53% to 57%). Adherence rates to 8 of the checklist items differed by >25% between journals. Among the five highest impact general medical journals, there is variable and incomplete adherence to the CONSORT for Abstracts reporting checklist of randomised trials, with substantial differences between individual journals. Lack of adherence to the CONSORT for Abstracts reporting checklist by high-impact medical journals impedes critical appraisal of important studies. We recommend diligent assessment of adherence to reporting guidelines by authors, reviewers and editors to promote transparency

The emerging use of Twitter by urological journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Nason, Gregory J; O'Kelly, Fardod; Kelly, Michael E; Phelan, Nigel; Manecksha, Rustom P; Lawrentschuk, Nathan; Murphy, Declan G

2015-03-01

To assess the emerging use of Twitter by urological journals. A search of the Journal of Citation Reports 2012 was performed to identify urological journals. These journals were then searched on Twitter.com. Each journal website was accessed for links to social media (SoMe). The number of 'tweets', followers and age of profile was determined. To evaluate the content, over a 6-month period (November 2013 to April 2014), all tweets were scrutinised on the journals Twitter profiles. To assess SoMe influence, the Klout score of each journal was also calculated. In all, 33 urological journals were identified. Eight (24.2%) had Twitter profiles. The mean (range) number of tweets and followers was 557 (19-1809) and 1845 (82-3692), respectively. The mean (range) age of the twitter profiles was 952 (314-1758) days with an average 0.88 tweets/day. A Twitter profile was associated with a higher mean impact factor of the journal (mean [sd] 3.588 [3.05] vs 1.78 [0.99], P = 0.013). Over a 6-month period, November 2013 to April 2014, the median (range) number of tweets per profile was 82 (2-415) and the median (range) number of articles linked to tweets was 73 (0-336). Of these 710 articles, 152 were Level 1 evidence-based articles, 101 Level 2, 278 Level 3 and 179 Level 4. The median (range) Klout score was 47 (19-58). The Klout scores of major journals did not exactly mirror their impact factors. SoMe is increasingly becoming an adjunct to traditional teaching methods, due to its convenient and user-friendly platform. Recently, many of the leading urological journals have used Twitter to highlight significant articles of interest to readers. © 2014 The Authors. BJU International © 2014 BJU International.

WE-E-204-02: Journal of Medical Physics and JACMP

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Williamson, J.

2016-01-01

Research papers authored by Medical Physicists address a large spectrum of oncologic, imaging, or basic research problems; exploit a wide range of physical and engineering methodologies; and often describe the efforts of a multidisciplinary research team. Given dozens of competing journals accepting medical physics articles, it may not be clear to an individual author which journal is the best venue for disseminating their work to the scientific community. Relevant factors usually include the Journal’s audience and scientific impact, but also such factors as perceived acceptance rate, interest in their topic, and quality of service. The purpose of this symposium is to provide the medical physics community with an overview of scope, review processes, and article guidelines for the following journals: Radiology, Medical Physics, International Journal of Radiation Biology and Physics, Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, and Practical Radiation Oncology. Senior members of the editorial board for each journal will provide details as to the journals review process, for example: single blind versus double blind reviews; open access policies, the hierarchy of the review process in terms of editorial board structure; the reality of acceptance, in terms of acceptance rate; and the types of research the journal prefers to publish. Other journals will be discussed as well. The goal is to provide for authors guidance before they begin to write their papers, not only for proper formatting, but also that the readership is appropriate for the particular paper, hopefully increasing the quality and impact of the paper and the likelihood of publication. Learning Objectives: To review each Journal’s submission and review process Guidance as to how to increase quality, impact and chances of acceptance To help decipher which journal is appropriate for a given work A. Karellas, Research collaboration with Koning, Corporation.

WE-E-204-02: Journal of Medical Physics and JACMP

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Williamson, J. [Virginia Commonwealth University (United States)

2016-06-15

Research papers authored by Medical Physicists address a large spectrum of oncologic, imaging, or basic research problems; exploit a wide range of physical and engineering methodologies; and often describe the efforts of a multidisciplinary research team. Given dozens of competing journals accepting medical physics articles, it may not be clear to an individual author which journal is the best venue for disseminating their work to the scientific community. Relevant factors usually include the Journal’s audience and scientific impact, but also such factors as perceived acceptance rate, interest in their topic, and quality of service. The purpose of this symposium is to provide the medical physics community with an overview of scope, review processes, and article guidelines for the following journals: Radiology, Medical Physics, International Journal of Radiation Biology and Physics, Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, and Practical Radiation Oncology. Senior members of the editorial board for each journal will provide details as to the journals review process, for example: single blind versus double blind reviews; open access policies, the hierarchy of the review process in terms of editorial board structure; the reality of acceptance, in terms of acceptance rate; and the types of research the journal prefers to publish. Other journals will be discussed as well. The goal is to provide for authors guidance before they begin to write their papers, not only for proper formatting, but also that the readership is appropriate for the particular paper, hopefully increasing the quality and impact of the paper and the likelihood of publication. Learning Objectives: To review each Journal’s submission and review process Guidance as to how to increase quality, impact and chances of acceptance To help decipher which journal is appropriate for a given work A. Karellas, Research collaboration with Koning, Corporation.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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 nonimaging content (11.5 ± 16.2 vs 6.9 ± 9.8, P 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.

The Focus Factor: A Dynamic Measure of Journal Specialisation

Science.gov (United States)

Nicolaisen, Jeppe; Frandsen, Tove Faber

2015-01-01

Introduction: We present a new bibliometric indicator to measure journal specialisation over time, named the focus factor. This new indicator is based on bibliographic coupling and counts the percentage of re-citations given in subsequent years. Method: The applicability of the new indicator is demonstrated on a selection of general science…

A comparison of citations across multidisciplinary psychology journals: a case study of two independent journals.

Science.gov (United States)

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 journals appear to be a relatively weak indicator of scientific merit; journals at any tier contain articles that are useful and of good quality.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

African Journals Online: Browse Alphabetically -- letter J

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Items 51 - 86 of 86 ... The Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Research is published by the College of Medical Sciences, University of Benin to encourage research into ... for 2013 as per Global Impact Factors (http://globalimpactfactor.com).

A Survey of the Prevalence and Impact of Reporting Guideline Endorsement in Pathology Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Caron, Justin E; March, Jordon K; Cohen, Michael B; Schmidt, Robert L

2017-10-01

To determine the prevalence of reporting guideline endorsement in pathology journals and to estimate the impact of guideline endorsement. We compared the quality of reporting in two sets of studies: (1) studies published in journals that explicitly mentioned a guideline vs studies published in journals that did not and (2) studies that cited a guideline vs studies that did not. The quality of reporting in prognostic biomarker studies was assessed using the REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK) guideline. We found that six (10%) of the 59 leading pathology journals explicitly mention reporting guidelines in the instructions to authors. Only one journal required authors to submit a checklist. There was significant variation in the rate at which various REMARK items were reported (P pathology journals, but guideline endorsement may improve the quality of reporting. © American Society for Clinical Pathology, 2017. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

Fate of Manuscripts Rejected From the Red Journal

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Holliday, Emma B.; Yang, George; Jagsi, Reshma; Hoffman, Karen E.; Bennett, Katherine Egan; Grace, Calley; Zietman, Anthony L.

2015-01-01

Purpose: To evaluate characteristics associated with higher rates of acceptance for original manuscripts submitted for publication to the International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics (IJROBP) and describe the fate of rejected manuscripts. Methods and Materials: Manuscripts submitted to the IJROBP from May 1, 2010, to August 31, 2010, and May 1, 2012, to August 31, 2012, were evaluated for author demographics and acceptance status. A PubMed search was performed for each IJROBP-rejected manuscript to ascertain whether the manuscript was ultimately published elsewhere. The Impact Factor of the accepting journal and the number of citations of the published manuscript were also collected. Results: Of the 500 included manuscripts, 172 (34.4%) were accepted and 328 (65.6%) were rejected. There was no significant difference in acceptance rates according to gender or degree of the submitting author, but there were significant differences seen based on the submitting author's country, rank, and h-index. On multivariate analysis, earlier year submitted (P<.0001) and higher author h-index (P=.006) remained significantly associated with acceptance into the IJROBP. Two hundred thirty-five IJROBP-rejected manuscripts (71.7%) were ultimately published in a PubMed-listed journal as of July 2014. There were no significant differences in any submitting author characteristics. Journals accepting IJROBP-rejected manuscripts had a lower median [interquartile range] 2013 impact factor compared with the IJROBP (2.45 [1.53-3.71] vs 4.176). The IJROBP-rejected manuscripts ultimately published elsewhere had a lower median [interquartile range] number of citations (1 [0-4] vs 6 [2-11]; P<.001), which persisted on multivariate analysis. Conclusions: The acceptance rate for manuscripts submitted to the IJROBP is approximately one-third, and approximately 70% of rejected manuscripts are ultimately published in other PubMed-listed journals, but these ultimate

Statistics in three biomedical journals

Czech Academy of Sciences Publication Activity Database

Pilčík, Tomáš

2003-01-01

Roč. 52, č. 1 (2003), s. 39-43 ISSN 0862-8408 R&D Projects: GA ČR GA310/03/1381 Grant - others:Howard Hughes Medical Institute(US) HHMI55000323 Institutional research plan: CEZ:AV0Z5052915 Keywords : statistics * usage * biomedical journals Subject RIV: EC - Immunology Impact factor: 0.939, year: 2003

What Do Experts Know About Forecasting Journal Quality? A Comparison with ISI Research Impact in Finance?

NARCIS (Netherlands)

C-L. Chang (Chia-Lin); M.J. McAleer (Michael)

2013-01-01

textabstractExperts possess knowledge and information that are not publicly available. The paper is concerned with forecasting academic journal quality and research impact using a survey of international experts from a national project on ranking academic finance journals in Taiwan. A comparison is

What Do Experts Know About Forecasting Journal Quality? A Comparison with ISI Research Impact in Finance

NARCIS (Netherlands)

C-L. Chang (Chia-Lin); M.J. McAleer (Michael)

2013-01-01

textabstractExperts possess knowledge and information that are not publicly available. The paper is concerned with forecasting academic journal quality and research impact using a survey of international experts from a national project on ranking academic finance journals in Taiwan. A comparison is

Globally national - locally international: Bibliometric analysis of a SEE psychology journal

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Pajić Dejan

2014-01-01

Full Text Available The article explores bibliometric features of the Serbian psychology journal Psihologija in the 2001-2012 period. Several basic indicators of the journal’s impact were generated and compared between two periods, before and after 2007 when Psihologija was included in Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI. Journal’s output was evaluated in regard to other psychology journals included in SSCI in the same year. The results have shown that Psihologija’s impact factor has raised following the increased internationalization of the journal, quantified as the proportion of articles published in English and/or written by foreign authors. However, Psihologija and other South East European (SEE journals still lack a solid international communication network, which is reflected in the absence of related journals and large proportion of citations from local authors. The article concludes with several suggestions for authors, journal editors, and science policy institutions.

Impacted science: impact is not importance.

Science.gov (United States)

Casadevall, Arturo; Fang, Ferric C

2015-10-13

The journal impact factor (IF) exerts a tremendous influence on the conduct of scientists. The obsession with IF has been compared to a medical condition, sometimes referred to as "IF mania" or "impactitis." Here, we analyze the difference between impact and importance, using examples from the history of science to show that these are not equivalent. If impact does not necessarily equal importance, but scientists are focused on high-impact work, there is a danger that misuse of the IF may adversely affect scientific progress. We suggest five measures to fight this malady: (i) diversify journal club selections, (ii) do not judge science on the publication venue, (iii) reduce the reliance on journal citation metrics for employment and advancement, (iv) discuss the misuse of the IF in ethics courses, and (v) cite the most appropriate sources. If IF mania is indeed a medical condition, the most appropriate course of action may be disimpaction. Copyright © 2015 Casadevall and Fang.

Correlation among the citation indices of Korean scientific journals listed in international databases

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jung A Kim

2014-02-01

Full Text Available We would like to verify the correlation among various citation indicators of 62 Korean scientific journals listed in the Web of Science (WoS and Scopus. From a total of 85 Korean journals listed in both WoS as of January 2013, and 132 journals listed in Scopus as of 2011, 62 Korean journals listed in both citation indices were selected for analysis. Citation index indicators selected for analysis include impact factor (IF, 5-year impact factor (5yrIF, Eigenfactor score (EF, article influence score (AIS (list of WoS indicators, SCImago journal rank (SJR, h-index, and impact index (ImIndex (list of Scopus indicators. It took an average of eight years for a newly founded journal to be listed in Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE. Since the IF, ImIndex, and AIS values failed to exceed 1.0, Korean journals’ popularity and prestige were confirmed to be minimal. Analyzed journals that were written in English exhibited higher SJR and h-index values than ones written in Korean. WoS’ IF exhibited a correlation with WoS’ 5yrIF, EF, AIS, and Scopus’ SJR, h-index, and ImIndex. Since the ‘popularity and prestige of Korean journals’ have been confirmed to be minimal, steps must be taken to improve this status. Popularity-based indicators have been shown to strongly correlate with prestige-based indicators in Korean science journals. Therefore, there must be a strategic approach taken to improve IF values.

A qualitative study of the impact of electronic journals on scholarly information behavior

OpenAIRE

Ollé, Candela; Borrego, Àngel (Borrego Huerta)

2010-01-01

A qualitative study of the impact of electronic journals on the information behavior of academics at Catalan universities shows that academics now read more, and more widely. However, their reading is becoming more superficial; they are compelled to improve their discrimination skills in order to decide what to read in more depth. The electronic accessibility of journals means that academics now make fewer library visits. Web browsing and TOC e-mail alerts are replacing physical browsing, and...

Brazilian Science between National and Foreign Journals: Methodology for Analyzing the Production and Impact in Emerging Scientific Communities

Science.gov (United States)

Calabró, Luciana; Souza, Diogo Onofre; Amaral, Lívio

2016-01-01

In recent decades, we have observed an intensification of science, technology and innovation activities in Brazil. The increase in production of scientific papers indexed in international databases, however, has not been accompanied by an equivalent increase in the impact of publications. This paper presents a methodology for analyzing production and the impact of certain research areas in Brazil related to two aspects: the origin of the journals (national or foreign) and international collaboration. These two variables were selected for being of particular importance in understanding the context of scientific production and communication in countries with emerging economies. The sample consisted of papers written by Brazilian researchers in 19 subfields of knowledge published from 2002 to 2011, totaling 85,082 papers. To calculate the impact, we adopted a normalized indicator called the relative subfield citedness (Rw) using a window of 5 years to obtain measurements evaluated in 2 different years: 2007 and 2012. The data on papers and citations were collected from the Web of Science database. From the results, we note that most of the subfields have presented, from one quinquennium to another, improved performance in the world production rankings. Regarding publication in national and foreign journals, we observed a trend in the distribution maintenance of production of the subfields based on the origin of the journal. Specifically, for impact, we identified a lower Rw pattern for Brazilian papers when they were published in national journals in all subfields. When Brazilian products are published in foreign journals, we observed a higher impact for those papers, even surpassing the average global impact in some subfields. For international collaboration, we analyzed the percentage of participation of foreign researchers and the connection between collaboration and the impact of papers, especially emphasizing the distinction of hyperauthorship papers in terms of

Brazilian Science between National and Foreign Journals: Methodology for Analyzing the Production and Impact in Emerging Scientific Communities.

Science.gov (United States)

Strehl, Letícia; Calabró, Luciana; Souza, Diogo Onofre; Amaral, Lívio

2016-01-01

In recent decades, we have observed an intensification of science, technology and innovation activities in Brazil. The increase in production of scientific papers indexed in international databases, however, has not been accompanied by an equivalent increase in the impact of publications. This paper presents a methodology for analyzing production and the impact of certain research areas in Brazil related to two aspects: the origin of the journals (national or foreign) and international collaboration. These two variables were selected for being of particular importance in understanding the context of scientific production and communication in countries with emerging economies. The sample consisted of papers written by Brazilian researchers in 19 subfields of knowledge published from 2002 to 2011, totaling 85,082 papers. To calculate the impact, we adopted a normalized indicator called the relative subfield citedness (Rw) using a window of 5 years to obtain measurements evaluated in 2 different years: 2007 and 2012. The data on papers and citations were collected from the Web of Science database. From the results, we note that most of the subfields have presented, from one quinquennium to another, improved performance in the world production rankings. Regarding publication in national and foreign journals, we observed a trend in the distribution maintenance of production of the subfields based on the origin of the journal. Specifically, for impact, we identified a lower Rw pattern for Brazilian papers when they were published in national journals in all subfields. When Brazilian products are published in foreign journals, we observed a higher impact for those papers, even surpassing the average global impact in some subfields. For international collaboration, we analyzed the percentage of participation of foreign researchers and the connection between collaboration and the impact of papers, especially emphasizing the distinction of hyperauthorship papers in terms of

Trends and comparison of female first authorship in high impact medical journals: observational study (1994-2014).

Science.gov (United States)

Filardo, Giovanni; da Graca, Briget; Sass, Danielle M; Pollock, Benjamin D; Smith, Emma B; Martinez, Melissa Ashley-Marie

2016-03-02

To examine changes in representation of women among first authors of original research published in high impact general medical journals from 1994 to 2014 and investigate differences between journals. Observational study. All original research articles published in Annals of Internal Medicine, Archives of Internal Medicine, The BMJ, JAMA, The Lancet, and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) for one issue every alternate month from February 1994 to June 2014. Time and journal of publication. Prevalence of female first authorship and its adjusted association with time of publication and journal, assessed using a multivariable logistic regression model that accounted for number of authors, study type and specialty/topic, continent where the study was conducted, and the interactions between journal and time of publication, study type, and continent. Estimates from this model were used to calculate adjusted odds ratios against the mean across the six journals, with 95% confidence intervals and P values to describe the associations of interest. The gender of the first author was determined for 3758 of the 3860 articles considered; 1273 (34%) were women. After adjustment, female first authorship increased significantly from 27% in 1994 to 37% in 2014 (Pauthorship decreasing; it also seemed to decline in recent years in The BMJ but started substantially higher (approximately 40%), and The BMJ had the highest total proportion of female first authors. Compared with the mean across all six journals, first authors were significantly less likely to be female in the NEJM (adjusted odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.53 to 0.89) and significantly more likely to be female in The BMJ (1.30, 1.01 to 1.66) over the study period. The representation of women among first authors of original research in high impact general medical journals was significantly higher in 2014 than 20 years ago, but it has plateaued in recent years and has declined in some journals. These results

Examining the Impact of the National Institutes of Health Public Access Policy on the Citation Rates of Journal Articles

Science.gov (United States)

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

Examining the Impact of the National Institutes of Health Public Access Policy on the Citation Rates of Journal Articles.

Science.gov (United States)

De Groote, Sandra L; Shultz, Mary; Smalheiser, Neil R

2015-01-01

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. 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. 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). 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).

Citation Analysis for Biomedical and Health Sciences Journals Published in Korea.

Science.gov (United States)

Oh, Juyeon; Chang, Hyejung; Kim, Jung A; Choi, Mona; Park, Ziyoung; Cho, Yoonhee; Lee, Eun-Gyu

2017-07-01

A citation analysis of biomedical and health sciences journals was conducted based on their enlistment in journal databases to identify the factors contributing to the citation metrics. Among the 1,219 academic journals managed by the National Center for Medical Information and Knowledge at the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 556 journals were included for analysis as of July 2016. The characteristics of the journals include history years, publication media, language, open-access policy as well as the status enlisted in international and domestic databases, such as Science Citation Index (SCI), Scopus, Medline, PubMed Central, Embase, and Korea Citation Index (KCI). Six bibliometric measures were collected from SCI, Scopus, and KCI as of 2015, the most recent disclosure year. Analyses of group differences and influential factors were conducted using t -tests, Mann-Whitney tests, and multiple regression. Journal characteristics, such as history years, publication media, and open-access policy, were not significant factors influencing global or domestical citation of the journals. However, global citations were higher for SCI and Medline enlisted journals than for their counterparts. Among KCI journals, the KCI impact factors of journals published in English only were lower. Efforts by journals to be enlisted in international databases, especially in SCI and Medline, are critical to enhance their global circulation. However, articles published in English only hinder the use of domestic researchers. Different strategies are required for enhancing international and domestic readerships.

What do Experts Know About Ranking Journal Quality? A Comparison with ISI Research Impact in Finance

NARCIS (Netherlands)

C-L. Chang (Chia-Lin); M.J. McAleer (Michael)

2012-01-01

textabstractExperts possess knowledge and information that are not publicly available. The paper is concerned with the ranking of academic journal quality and research impact using a survey of experts from a national project on ranking academic finance journals. A comparison is made with publicly

IMPLEMENTANDO UN ÍNDICE QUE PONDERE EL IMPACTO DE UNA REVISTA CIENTÍFICA EN FUNCIÓN DE SU JUVENTUD (Implementing an Index that Weighs the Impact of a Scientific Journal Based on its Early Age

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Pascual Izquierdo-Egea

2018-03-01

Full Text Available Se propone un índice que pondere el impacto de una revista científica en función de su juventud. Hasta ahora, solo algunos índices contemplan factores como la antigüedad o el prestigio en la valoración del impacto, ignorando la importancia de la juventud. ENGLISH: This article proposes an index that weights the impact of a scientific journal based on its early age. Until now, only a few indexes consider factors such as age or prestige, ignoring the role that the early age of a journal might play in its impact assessment.

Levels of evidence: a comparison between top medical journals and general pediatric journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Jacobson, Dustin A; Bhanot, Kunal; Yarascavitch, Blake; Chuback, Jennifer; Rosenbloom, Ehud; Bhandari, Mohit

2015-02-12

Given the large number of publications in all fields of practice, it is essential that clinicians focus on the resources that provide the highest level of evidence (LOE). We sought to determine the LOE that exists in the field of pediatrics, present in the general pediatric as well as high impact clinical literature. Clinical pediatric literature, published between April 2011 and March 2012 inclusive in high-impact clinical journals (HICJ) (New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association, & The Lancet) and the highest-impact general pediatric journals (GPJ) (Pediatrics, Journal of Pediatrics, & Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine), was assessed. In addition to the LOE, articles were evaluated on criteria including subspecialty within pediatrics, number of authors, number of centers, and other parameters. Eligible level I randomized control trials were appraised using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. Of 6511 articles screened, 804 met inclusion criteria (68 in HICJ and 736 in GPJ). On average, LOE in pediatrics-focused articles within The Lancet were significantly higher than all GPJ (p journals and articles of greater clinical impact.

[Eigenfactor: a recent opportunity of measuring scientific journals].

Science.gov (United States)

Gracza, Tünde

2008-08-31

There are various measures of a scientific journal's impact or relevance. Probably the best known measures based on citations are the impact factor published by Thomson Scientific, and the Hirsch-index created by Andras Schubert. Citations have long been an important way to evaluate the interest, visibility and impact of research, and the corresponding researchers. These ranks are very important for the researchers when deciding where to submit their manuscripts. Recently, Carl Bergstrom has suggested a new indicator called Eigenfactor. Eigenfactor ranks journals much as Google ranks websites. All sources consulted by the researcher during the research process contribute to the determination of the Eigenfactor. Is it possible that Eigenfactor will have the leading role in scientometry starting in the next century?

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

Science.gov (United States)

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 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 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

Situating peace journalism in journalism studies: A critical appraisal

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Thomas Hanitzsch

2007-10-01

Full Text Available Most wars were not brought to our attention if there were no journalists to report on them and no news media to send reporters to conflict spots. At the same time, the media often give priority to conflict and war at the expense of playing a positive role in attempts to bring about peace. The concept of peace journalism is, therefore, seen as an alternative model to traditional ways of war reporting. This article argues, however, that the idea of peace journalism comes as old wine in new bottles. Although carrying a noble goal, it ignores the manifold nuances in the media and tends to highlight the exceptional, spectacular and negative of war coverage. The idea of peace journalism tends to overestimate the influence journalists and the media have on political decisions; and it often understands audiences in terms of a passive mass that needs to be enlightened by virtue of peace reporting. In addition to this, peace journalism is, to a considerable extent, based on an overly individualistic perspective and ignores the many structural constraints that shape and limit the work of journalists: few personnel, time and material resources; editorial procedures and hierarchies; textual constraints; availability of sources; access to the scene and information in general - just to name a few. All this suggests that the conduct of peace journalism is not a matter of individual leeway, and media structures and professional routines cannot be modified from the position of the individual journalist. Modern corporate journalism involves processes of organized news production, thus giving priority to organizational and institutional factors as well as processes of professional socialization. To have any impact on the way the news is made, and its critical scrutiny, the advocates of peace journalism must address the structural constraints of news production. The discussion of peace journalism, and particularly of its practical implications, must be tied to the

A Fine Balance: How Authors Strategize Around Journal Submission.

Science.gov (United States)

Ginsburg, Shiphra; Lynch, Meghan; Walsh, Catharine M

2018-04-24

Publishing in peer-reviewed journals is essential for medical education researchers. Competition remains fierce for top journals and authors are advised to consider impact factor (IF), audience, and alignment of focus. However, little is known about how authors balance these factors when making submission decisions. The authors aimed to explore decision-making around journal choice. Using constructivist grounded theory, the authors conducted and analyzed 27 semi-structured phone interviews (August-November 2016) with medical education researchers. Participants were recruited from a larger study and all had presented abstracts at medical education meetings in 2005 or 2006. When deciding where to submit an article, participants weighed a journal's IF and prestige against other factors, such as a journal's vision and mission, finding the right audience, study-specific factors including perceived quality of the work, and the peer-review process. The opportunity cost of aiming high and risking rejection was influenced by career stage and external pressures. Despite much higher IFs, clinical journals were viewed as less desirable for establishing legitimacy in the medical education field and were often the target for less novel or rigorous work. Participants expressed dissatisfaction with peer review in general, citing overly critical and poorly informed reviewers. Authors strategize around a particular article's submission by attempting to balance many inter-related factors. Their perceptions that high IF clinical journals are viewed as less prestigious in this field can lead to publication strategies that run counter to advice given to junior faculty. This has implications for mentorship and institutional leadership.

Medical journals--in the news and for the wrong reasons.

Science.gov (United States)

Pai, Sanjay A

2014-01-01

2013 has been a landmark year, in fact, a bad year for biomedical journals. Medical journals and their editors have been respected for long, as they are the harbingers of change and of progress in scientific thought. Science expects transparency from the agents through which scientists publish their latest research findings and this expectation is usually fulfilled. Recent developments have, however, thrown into doubt the integrity of some science journals, their editors, and by extension, the entire field of biomedical and science publishing. These developments involve wide-ranging issues--the impact factor, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the birth, existence and rise of predatory journals.

Clarivate Analytics: Continued Omnia vanitas Impact Factor Culture.

Science.gov (United States)

Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A; Bernès, Sylvain

2018-02-01

This opinion paper takes aim at an error made recently by Clarivate Analytics in which it sent out an email that congratulated academics for becoming exclusive members of academia's most cited elite, the Highly Cited Researchers (HCRs). However, that email was sent out to an undisclosed number of non-HCRs, who were offered an apology shortly after, through a bulk mail, which tried to down-play the importance of the error, all the while praising the true HCRs. When Clarivate Analytics senior management was contacted, the company declined to offer an indication of the number of academics who had been contacted and erroneously awarded the HCR status. We believe that this regrettable blunder, together with the opacity offered by the company, fortify the corporate attitude about the value of the journal impact factor (JIF), and what it represents, namely a marketing tool that is falsely used to equate citations with quality, worth, or influence. The continued commercialization of metrics such as the JIF is at the heart of their use to assess the "quality" of a researcher, their work, or a journal, and contributes to a great extent to driving scientific activities towards a futile endeavor.

Opinion of Health Care Professionals Towards Submitting a Research Article to a Journal

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Srikanth

2013-08-01

Full Text Available There are no specific criteria to measure a journals quality, but indexation of a journal in a reputed database such as PubMed/Medline, SCOPUS, EMBASE etc, and whether the journal is having an impact factor produced by Thomson Reuters are looked upon. Many more indexation database have come up recently, and authors are publishing more articles than before.

What is history of psychology? : Network analysis of Journal Citation Reports, 2009-2015

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Burman, Jeremy Trevelyan

2017-01-01

This essay considers the History of Psychology—its interests and boundaries—using the data behind the Journal Impact Factor system. Advice is provided regarding what journals to follow, which broad frames to consider in presenting research findings, and where to publish the resulting studies in

What is history of psychology? : Network analysis of Journal Citation Reports, 2009-2015

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Burman, Jeremy Trevelyan

This essay considers the History of Psychology—its interests and boundaries—using the data behind the Journal Impact Factor system. Advice is provided regarding what journals to follow, which broad frames to consider in presenting research findings, and where to publish the resulting studies in

Geophysical Research Letters: New policies improve top-cited geosciences journal

Science.gov (United States)

Calais, Eric; Diffenbaugh, Noah; D'Odorico, Paolo; Harris, Ruth; Knorr, Wolfgang; Lavraud, Benoit; Mueller, Anne; Peterson, William; Rignot, Eric; Srokosz, Meric; Strutton, Peter; Tyndall, Geoff; Wysession, Michael; Williams, Paul

2010-01-01

Geophysical Research Letters (GRL) is the American Geophysical Union's premier journal of fast, groundbreaking communication. It rapidly publishes high- impact,letter-length articles, and it is the top-cited multidisciplinary geosciences journal over the past 10 years, with an impact factor that increased again in 2009, to 3.204. For manuscripts submitted to GRL, the median time to first and final decision is 23 and 27 days, respectively—a 35% improvement since 2007—and the median time from submission to publication is 13 weeks for 90% of GRL papers—a 25% improvement since 2007. Among high-impact publications in the geosciences, GRL has the fastest turnaround.

Thirty years of disclosure of conflict of interest in surgery journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Probst, Pascal; Hüttner, Felix J; Klaiber, Ulla; Diener, Markus K; Büchler, Markus W; Knebel, Phillip

2015-04-01

A conflict of interest (COI) creates the risk that a professional judgment will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest. In practice, the leading concern is the creation of bias by industry sponsorship. Several organizations for ethics in scientific publishing exist, and standardized disclosure forms have been developed. The aim of this study was to investigate the present status of the definition, management, and disclosure of COI in journals devoted to general and abdominal surgery. Information on publisher, definition of COI, whether COI disclosure was mandatory, publication of the disclosure statement with the article, and when publication of disclosure statements was introduced were gathered from instructions for authors and from journal editors and presented descriptively. The hypothesis that journals with a disclosure policy have greater impact factors was tested with a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. A sample of 64 journals was investigated. In 8 journals (13%) disclosure was deemed unnecessary. In the remaining 56 journals (88%) disclosure of COI was mandatory and in 39 of these journals (61%) the COI statement was published with the article. Journals declaring COI disclosure as mandatory had a greater impact factor (0.626 vs 1.732; P = .006). Transparency is critical to the reliability of evidence-based medicine. All efforts should be made to give the reader the maximum amount of information. We recommend that every surgeon maintain a standardized, up-to-date disclosure form. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A Bibliometric History of the Journal of Psychology Between 1936 and 2015.

Science.gov (United States)

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).

Open-Access Mega-Journals: A Bibliometric Profile.

Science.gov (United States)

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

An analysis of radiological research publications in high impact general medical journals between 1996 and 2010.

Science.gov (United States)

Ku, You Jin; Yoon, Dae Young; Yun, Eun Joo; Baek, Sora; Lim, Kyoung Ja; Seo, Young Lan; Choi, Chul Soon; Bae, Sang Hoon

2013-06-01

To evaluate scientific papers published by radiologists in high impact general medical journals between 1996 and 2010. A MEDLINE search was performed in five high impact general medical journals (AIM, BMJ, JAMA, Lancet, and NEJM) for all articles of which a radiologist was the first author between 1996 and 2010. The following information was abstracted from the original articles: radiological subspecialty, imaging technique used, type of research, sample size, study design, statistical analysis, study outcome, declared funding, number of authors, collaboration, and country of the first author. Of 216 (0.19%) articles were published by radiologists in five general medical journals between 1996 and 2010, 83 were original articles. Fifteen (18.1%) original articles were concerned with the field of vascular/interventional radiology, 24 (28.9%) used combined imaging techniques, 76 (91.6%) were clinical research, 63 (75.9%) had a sample size of >50, 65 (78.3%) were prospective, 78 (94.0%) performed statistical analysis, 83 (100%) showed positive study outcomes, 57 (68.7%) were funded, 49 (59.0%) had from four to seven authors, and 79 (95.2%) were collaborative studies. A very small number (0.19%) in five high impact general medical journals was published by radiologists between 1996 and 2010. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

I publish in I edit?--Do editorial board members of urologic journals preferentially publish their own scientific work?

Science.gov (United States)

Mani, Jens; Makarević, Jasmina; Juengel, Eva; Ackermann, Hanns; Nelson, Karen; Bartsch, Georg; Haferkamp, Axel; Blaheta, Roman A

2013-01-01

Scientists who are members of an editorial board have been accused of preferentially publishing their scientific work in the journal where they serve as editor. Reputation and academic standing do depend on an uninterrupted flow of published scientific work and the question does arise as to whether publication mainly occurs in the self-edited journal. This investigation was designed to determine whether editorial board members of five urological journals were more likely to publish their research reports in their own rather than in other journals. A retrospective analysis was conducted for all original reports published from 2001-2010 by 65 editorial board members nominated to the boards of five impact leading urologic journals in 2006. Publications before editorial board membership, 2001-2005, and publications within the period of time as an editorial board member, 2006-2010, were identified. The impact factors of the journals were also recorded over the time period 2001-2010 to see whether a change in impact factor correlated with publication locality. In the five journals as a whole, scientific work was not preferentially published in the journal in which the scientists served as editor. However, significant heterogeneity among the journals was evident. One journal showed a significant increase in the amount of published papers in the 'own' journal after assumption of editorship, three journals showed no change and one journal showed a highly significant decrease in publishing in the 'own' journal after assumption of editorship.

Research Quality Assessment and Planning Journals. The Italian Perspective.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Bruno Zanon

2014-02-01

Full Text Available Assessment of research products is a crucial issue for universities and research institutions faced with internationalization and competition. Disciplines are reacting differently to this challenge, and planning, in its various forms – from urban design to process­oriented sectors – is under strain because the increasingly common assessment procedures based on the number of articles published in ranked journals and on citation data are not generally accepted. The reputation of journals, the impact of publications, and the profiles of scholars are increasingly defined by means of indexes such as impact factor and citations counts, but these metrics are questioned because they do not take account of all journals and magazines – in particular those published in languages other than English – and they do not consider teaching and other activities typical of academics and which have a real impact on planning practices at the local level. In Italy the discussion is particularly heated because assessment procedures are recent, the disciplinary community is not used to publishing in ranked international journals, and the Italian literature is not attuned to the international quality criteria. The paper reviews the recent debate on planning journals and research assessment. It focuses on the Italian case from the perspective of improving current practices.

JUTH JOURNAL MEDICAL, MAY - AUGUST 2012 EDITION

African Journals Online (AJOL)

user

neonatal mortality in Nigeria and other parts of Africa. ... impact of the predominant socio-economic factors that may contribute to neonatal sepsis in this ..... Neonatal septicaemia in Ilorin: bacterial pathogens and antibiotic sensitivity pattern. African Journal of Medicine and Medical Sciences. 2002;31(2):127-30. 15. Anah MU ...

Magnitude of effects in clinical trials published in high-impact general medical journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Siontis, Konstantinos C M; Evangelou, Evangelos; Ioannidis, John P A

2011-10-01

Prestigious journals select for publication studies that are considered most important and informative. We aimed to examine whether high-impact general (HIG) medical journals systematically demonstrate more favourable results for experimental interventions compared with the rest of the literature. We scrutinized systematic reviews of the Cochrane Database (Issue 4, 2009) and meta-analyses published in four general journals (2008-09). Eligible articles included ≥1 binary outcome meta-analysis(es) pertaining to effectiveness with ≥1 clinical trial(s) published in NEJM, JAMA or Lancet. Effect sizes in trials from NEJM, JAMA or Lancet were compared with those from other trials in the same meta-analyses by deriving summary relative odds ratios (sRORs). Additional analyses examined separately early- and late-published trials in HIG journals and journal-specific effects. A total of 79 meta-analyses including 1043 clinical trials were analysed. Trials in HIG journals had similar effects to trials in other journals, when there was large-scale evidence, but showed more favourable results for experimental interventions when they were small. When HIG trials had less than 40 events, the sROR was 1.64 [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.23-2.18). The difference was most prominent when small early trials published in HIG journals were compared with subsequent trials [sROR 2.68 (95% CI: 1.33-5.38)]. Late-published HIG trials showed no consistent inflation of effects. The patterns did not differ beyond chance between NEJM, JAMA or Lancet. Small trials published in the most prestigious journals show more favourable effects for experimental interventions, and this is most prominent for early-published trials in such journals. No effect inflation is seen for large trials.

An analysis of radiological research publications in high impact general medical journals between 1996 and 2010

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Ku, You Jin; Yoon, Dae Young; Yun, Eun Joo; Baek, Sora; Lim, Kyoung Ja; Seo, Young Lan; Choi, Chul Soon; Bae, Sang Hoon

2013-01-01

Highlights: ► Radiologists published only 0.2% of articles in five general medical journals. ► Most original articles from radiologists were funded and were prospective studies. ► Radiology researchers from only 11 countries published at least one original article. -- Abstract: Objective: To evaluate scientific papers published by radiologists in high impact general medical journals between 1996 and 2010. Methods: A MEDLINE search was performed in five high impact general medical journals (AIM, BMJ, JAMA, Lancet, and NEJM) for all articles of which a radiologist was the first author between 1996 and 2010. The following information was abstracted from the original articles: radiological subspecialty, imaging technique used, type of research, sample size, study design, statistical analysis, study outcome, declared funding, number of authors, collaboration, and country of the first author. Results: Of 216 (0.19%) articles were published by radiologists in five general medical journals between 1996 and 2010, 83 were original articles. Fifteen (18.1%) original articles were concerned with the field of vascular/interventional radiology, 24 (28.9%) used combined imaging techniques, 76 (91.6%) were clinical research, 63 (75.9%) had a sample size of >50, 65 (78.3%) were prospective, 78 (94.0%) performed statistical analysis, 83 (100%) showed positive study outcomes, 57 (68.7%) were funded, 49 (59.0%) had from four to seven authors, and 79 (95.2%) were collaborative studies. Conclusions: A very small number (0.19%) in five high impact general medical journals was published by radiologists between 1996 and 2010

Is Qualitative Research Second Class Science? A Quantitative Longitudinal Examination of Qualitative Research in Medical Journals

Science.gov (United States)

Shuval, Kerem; Harker, Karen; Roudsari, Bahman; Groce, Nora E.; Mills, Britain; Siddiqi, Zoveen; Shachak, Aviv

2011-01-01

Background Qualitative research appears to be gaining acceptability in medical journals. Yet, little is actually known about the proportion of qualitative research and factors affecting its publication. This study describes the proportion of qualitative research over a 10 year period and correlates associated with its publication. Design A quantitative longitudinal examination of the proportion of original qualitative research in 67 journals of general medicine during a 10 year period (1998–2007). The proportion of qualitative research was determined by dividing original qualitative studies published (numerator) by all original research articles published (denominator). We used a generalized estimating equations approach to assess the longitudinal association between the proportion of qualitative studies and independent variables (i.e. journals' country of publication and impact factor; editorial/methodological papers discussing qualitative research; and specific journal guidelines pertaining to qualitative research). Findings A 2.9% absolute increase and 3.4-fold relative increase in qualitative research publications occurred over a 10 year period (1.2% in 1998 vs. 4.1% in 2007). The proportion of original qualitative research was independently and significantly associated with the publication of editorial/methodological papers in the journal (b = 3.688, P = 0.012); and with qualitative research specifically mentioned in guidelines for authors (b = 6.847, Pqualitative research was associated only with journals published in the UK in comparison to other countries, yet with borderline statistical significance (b = 1.776, P = 0.075). The journals' impact factor was not associated with the publication of qualitative research. Conclusions Despite an increase in the proportion of qualitative research in medical journals over a 10 year period, the proportion remains low. Journals' policies pertaining to qualitative research, as expressed by the

Models of Journalism

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Bro Petersen, Peter

Models of Journalism investigates the most fundamental questions of how journalists can best serve the public and what factors enable or obstruct them in doing so. The book evaluates previous scholarly attempts at modeling the function and influencing factors of journalism, and proceeds to develop...... a range of important new models that take contemporary challenges faced by journalists and journalism into account. Among these new models is the "chronology-of-journalism", which introduces a new set of influencing factors that can affect journalists in the 21st century. These include internal factors...... – journalistic principles, precedents and practices – and external factors – journalistic production, publication and perception. Another new model, the "journalistic compass", delineates differences and similarities between some of the most important journalistic roles in the media landscape. For each new model...

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.

Science.gov (United States)

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.

The international impact of scientific journals - how "international" are the international journals?

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Wormell, Irene

the analysis of the geographical distribution of authors, citations and subscriptions for seven selected LIS journals......the analysis of the geographical distribution of authors, citations and subscriptions for seven selected LIS journals...

Open-access publishing for pharmacy-focused journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Clauson, Kevin A; Veronin, Michael A; Khanfar, Nile M; Lou, Jennie Q

2008-08-15

Pharmacy-focused journals that are available in open-access (OA), freely accessible, hybrid, or traditional formats were identified. Relevant journals were accessed from PubMed, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, EMBASE, and the Pharmacology and Pharmacy category of Thomson Scientific Journal Citation Reports. Criteria were established to select journals that satisfied the definition of pharmacy focused. Journals were assessed based on accessibility, copyright transfer requirements, and restrictions. If tracked, the journal's impact factor (IF) was identified according to classification, and medians were calculated for each journal category. A total of 317 pharmacy-focused journals were identified. The majority of pharmacy-focused journals identified were traditional/non-OA (n = 240). A smaller number of journals were freely accessible/ non-OA (n = 37), freely accessible/non-OA with content restrictions (n = 20), or freely available/non-OA with date restrictions (n = 18). The fewest number of journals were completely OA (n = 2). The median IF for the 185 journals whose IF was tracked was 2.029. The median IF for freely accessible and hybrid journals (n = 42) was 2.550, whereas the median IF for traditional journals (n = 143) was 1.900. A very small number of pharmacy-focused journals adhere to the OA paradigm of access. However, journals that adopt some elements of the OA model, chiefly free accessibility, may be more likely to be cited than traditional journals. Pharmacy practitioners, educators, and researchers could benefit from the advantages that OA offers but should understand its financial disadvantages.

Validated Measures of Publication Quality: Guide for Novice Researchers to Choose an Appropriate Journal for Paper Submission

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Mohammad H. Ebrahimzadeh

2016-04-01

Full Text Available There is always a concern regarding the "quality" of publications as an index for promotion and career advancement. There are some ways to measure this "quality" including impact factor and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR as a measure of journals’ level of impact, h-index as a measure of researchers’ level of impact, and visibility and citation as a measure of individual papers’ level of impact. Paper publication is bringing revenue to some journals by soliciting money from whom that must publish or perish. This raises the suspicion of fraud toward Open Access journals because sometimes charlatans pocket the money via creating predatory journals or even creating counterfeit websites using terms similar to those already known. For this reason, legitimate Open Access journals have to be authenticated. Tempting emails from Open Access journals showing high indices of quality might entrap the new researchers, which could be prevented by awareness of the below terms [Figure 1]. ...

Charting the Evolution of Journalism: the Horizon of Democracy

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Peter Dahlgren

2010-12-01

Full Text Available The contemporary developments within journalism raise many issues about its future. Working with a rather wide brush, this article looks at some key factors that are shaping journalism at present. The author sketches some general parameters that apply to most Western societies; the perspective draws especially the US, where the crisis has been extensively analyzed. Every national context, however, has its own version of journalism’s evolution. The author emphasizes what he sees as being journalism’s fundamental raison d’être, namely to facilitate and enhance democracy. This includes nourishing its norms, values and practices; journalism must touch us, inspire us, and contribute to our daily democratic horizons. The article begins with a quick glimpse at the various structural factors that are shaping the transformation of journalism. From there, the author probes some of the contemporary technological developments and their impact on journalism, and looks at how the audiences for journalism are changing, along with their roles as citizens and consumers. In the final section the article explores the intensifying multi-perspective character of the emerging journalistic landscape, and some of its implications.

The year 2014 in the European Heart Journal--Cardiovascular Imaging: part II.

Science.gov (United States)

Gerber, Bernhard L; Edvardsen, Thor; Pierard, Luc A; Saraste, Antti; Knuuti, Juhani; Maurer, Gerald; Habib, Gilbert; Lancellotti, Patrizio

2015-11-01

The European Heart Journal-Cardiovascular Imaging, created in 2012, has become a reference for publishing multimodality cardiovascular imaging scientific and review papers. The impressive 2014 impact factor of 4.105 confirms the important position of our journal. In this part, we summarize the most important studies from the journal's third year, with specific emphasis on cardiomyopathies, congenital heart diseases, valvular heart diseases, and heart failure. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2015. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Review of Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance 2012

Science.gov (United States)

2013-01-01

There were 90 articles published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) in 2012, which is an 8% increase in the number of articles since 2011. The quality of the submissions continues to increase. The editors are delighted to report that the 2011 JCMR Impact Factor (which is published in June 2012) has risen to 4.44, up from 3.72 for 2010 (as published in June 2011), a 20% increase. The 2011 impact factor means that the JCMR papers that were published in 2009 and 2010 were cited on average 4.44 times in 2011. The impact factor undergoes natural variation according to citation rates of papers in the 2 years following publication, and is significantly influenced by highly cited papers such as official reports. However, the progress of the journal's impact over the last 5 years has been impressive. Our acceptance rate is approximately 25%, and has been falling as the number of articles being submitted has been increasing. In accordance with Open-Access publishing, the JCMR articles go on-line as they are accepted with no collating of the articles into sections or special thematic issues. For this reason, the Editors have felt that it is useful once per calendar year to summarize the papers for the readership into broad areas of interest or theme, so that areas of interest can be reviewed in a single article in relation to each other and other recent JCMR articles. The papers are presented in broad themes and set in context with related literature and previously published JCMR papers to guide continuity of thought in the journal. We hope that you find the open-access system increases wider reading and citation of your papers, and that you will continue to send your quality manuscripts to JCMR for publication. PMID:24006874

The Impact of the Programme for International Student Assessment on Academic Journals

Science.gov (United States)

Dominguez, Maria; Vieira, Maria-Jose; Vidal, Javier

2012-01-01

The aim of this study is to assess the impact of PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) on international scientific journals. A bibliometric analysis was conducted of publications included in three main scientific publication databases: Eric, EBSCOhost and the ISI Web of Knowledge, from 2002 to 2010. The paper focused on four main…

Using Google Scholar to Estimate the Impact of Journal Articles in Education

Science.gov (United States)

van Aalst, Jan

2010-01-01

This article discusses the potential of Google Scholar as an alternative or complement to the Web of Science and Scopus for measuring the impact of journal articles in education. Three handbooks on research in science education, language education, and educational technology were used to identify a sample of 112 accomplished scholars. Google…

Selection of Non Mapping Sciences Journals Suitable for Publishing Mapping Sciences Topics

OpenAIRE

Frančula, Nedjeljko; Lapaine, Miljenko; Stojanovski, Jadranka

2013-01-01

In Croatia, for career advancement in technical sciences, including then field of mapping sciences (in Croatian geodezija), it is necessary to publish a number of papers in journals indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded or Current Contents databases, whereby a certain number of papers have to be published in journals with impact factor (JIF) higher than the median of the subject category in which they are listed in the Journal Citation Reports database. Since these databases index 17 map...

The practice of strategic journal self-citation : It exists, and should stop (a note from the editor-in-chief)

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Chorus, C.G.

2015-01-01

This note highlights how journal self-citation practices substantially influence impact factor-based journal rankings in the field of Transportation. Furthermore, by means of analyzing Thomson Reuters’ most recent Journal Citation Report (JCR), I show that a substantial share of these self-citations

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Institute for Scientific Information-indexed biomedical journals of Saudi Arabia

Science.gov (United States)

Rohra, Dileep K.; Rohra, Vikram K.; Cahusac, Peter

2016-01-01

Objectives: To compare the journal impact factor (JIF) and Eigenfactor score (ES) of Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)-indexed biomedical journals published from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) over the last 8 years. Methods: This is a retrospective study, conducted at Alfaisal University, Riyadh, KSA from January to March 2016. The Journal Citation Reports of ISI Web of Knowledge were accessed, and 6 Saudi biomedical journals were included for analysis. Results: All Saudi journals have improved their IF compared with their baseline. However, the performance of the Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Neurosciences has been exceptionally good. The biggest improvement in percent growth in JIF was seen in the Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal (approximately 887%) followed by Neurosciences (approximately 462%). Interestingly, the ES of all biomedical journals, except Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology and Saudi Medical Journal, increased over the years. The greatest growth in ES (more than 5 fold) was noted for Neurosciences and Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal. Conclusion: This study shows that the overall quality of all Saudi biomedical journals has improved in the last 8 years. PMID:27761565

Current Medical Journalism Needs Major Revisions

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Alireza Baratloo

2018-05-01

Full Text Available Medical journalism commenced during early nineteenth century as an impressive adjunct for medical education. It is considered as a platform to share the results of the research studies and to disseminate medical information that could impact the present concept and practice of the medicine field. Medical journalism gained immense attention over the years; however, the present scenario revealed certain limitations. A rise in the number of researchers, by interest or forcefully, has led to an increase in the journal count, resulting in several fake research articles being published in the journals. This leads to inappropriate research and low quality of journals, where the data appearing in the research articles is not authentic; thus, the journals publishing such articles face several issues while verifying the authenticity of the data provided. All journals, in particular, the recent ones strive to achieve immense importance in regards to the impact factor, h-index, and similar quality assessments; however, attaining similar scores as that of the well-known journals is impossible. Hence, as a futile effort, the editorial team of the new or latest journals consider adding more references in their articles in order to achieve a higher score; however, certain references from the previously published papers, may decode as a conflict of interest. Based on an unwritten and unavailable rule, all new journals try to publish papers in same format as publishing in famous journals, and do not dare to deconstruct it. It seems that deconstruction should also be performed by the old journals founded the current style! In order to avoid the aforementioned issues, the Advanced Journal of Emergency Medicine emerged with the concept of being different, deconstructive, and without any futile competition with the other journals. Accordingly, we consider a large audience with several degrees of medical education to participate in the field of research, make the

Evaluating the Research Quality of Education Journals in China: Implications for Increasing Global Impact in Peripheral Countries

Science.gov (United States)

Zhao, Juanjuan; Beckett, Gulbahar H.; Wang, Lihshing Leigh

2017-01-01

There has been a rapid growth of academic research and publishing in non-Western countries. However, academic journal articles in these peripheral countries suffer from low citation impact and limited global recognition. This critical review systematically analyzed 1,096 education research journal articles that were published in China in a 10-year…

Evaluating the MEDLINE Core Clinical Journals filter: data-driven evidence assessing clinical utility.

Science.gov (United States)

Klein-Fedyshin, Michele; Ketchum, Andrea M; Arnold, Robert M; Fedyshin, Peter J

2014-12-01

MEDLINE offers the Core Clinical Journals filter to limit to clinically useful journals. To determine its effectiveness for searching and patient-centric decision making, this study compared literature used for Morning Report in Internal Medicine with journals in the filter. An EndNote library with references answering 327 patient-related questions during Morning Report from 2007 to 2012 was exported to a file listing variables including designated Core Clinical Journal, Impact Factor, date used and medical subject. Bradford's law of scattering was applied ranking the journals and reflecting their clinical utility. Recall (sensitivity) and precision of the Core Morning Report journals and non-Core set was calculated. This study applied bibliometrics to compare the 628 articles used against these criteria to determine journals impacting decision making. Analysis shows 30% of clinically used articles are from the Core Clinical Journals filter and 16% of the journals represented are Core titles. When Bradford-ranked, 55% of the top 20 journals are Core. Articles sources used. Among the 63 Morning Report subjects, 55 have <50% precision and 41 have <50% recall including 37 subjects with 0% precision and 0% recall. Low usage of publications within the Core Clinical Journals filter indicates less relevance for hospital-based care. The divergence from high-impact medicine titles suggests clinically valuable journals differ from academically important titles. With few subjects demonstrating high recall or precision, the MEDLINE Core Clinical Journals filter may require a review and update to better align with current clinical needs. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Economic Journal in Russia: Quality Assessment Issues

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ol’ga Valentinovna Tret’yakova

2016-05-01

Full Text Available The paper attempts to assess economic journals included in the List of peer-reviewed scientific journals and editions that are authorized to publish the principal research findings of doctoral (candidate’s dissertations (the VAK List, it was established by the Decision of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation and entered into force on December 01, 2016. The general assessment of the journals that include more than 380 titles is carried out by analyzing their bibliometric indicators in the system of the Russian Science Citation Index, in particular, by examining the values of their impact factors. The analysis conducted at the Institute of Socio-economic Development of Territories of RAS shows that a relatively small number of economic journals publish a significant proportion of articles that obtain a large share of citations. The author reveals that the new VAK List includes over 50% of journals specializing in economic sciences, which have a lower level of citation or which are virtually not cited at all. This indirectly indicates that such journals are “left behind” the “main stream of science”, that their significance is local, availability low, attractiveness for the audience and scientific authority insufficient. The analysis proves that when forming the list of peer-reviewed scientific publications recommended for publication of dissertation research findings, along with other criteria, it is advisable to use tools that help assess the level of the journal. It is very important that the evaluation had quantitative expression and served as a specific measure for ranking the journals. One of these tools may be a criterion value for the two-year impact factor, which helps identify journals with a sufficient citation level. The paper presents the results of analysis of the RSCI list, which was proposed by the Council for Science under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation as an

Secular trends in impact factor of neonatology publications over a 10-year period.

Science.gov (United States)

Marom, Ronella; Mimouni, Francis B; Cohen, Shlomi; Lubetzky, Ronit; Mandel, Dror

2012-10-01

  To test the hypotheses that published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in neonatology with negative results (NR) are more likely to be published in journals with lower impact factor (IF) than those with positive results (PR); that there is an increase in the number of yearly published RCTs; that studies with large sample sizes are likely to be published in journals with higher IF.   We used all English-written RCTs registered in MEDLINE between 1/1/2001-31/12/2010 in the field of neonatology. Each RCT was classified as having a PR or NR. IF of each journal was determined for the year of publication.   We identified 329 RCTs. Yearly number of RCTs varied between 19 and 46, with no significant consistent linear increase over the years. There was no significant change over the years in average IF or in average patient size. IF and sample size of the studies were not significantly higher in studies with PR than in studies with NR.   The number of RCTs per year in the field of neonatology has stabilized in the past 10 years, and RCTs with positive or negative results are published in journals of similar IF. © 2012 The Author(s)/Acta Paediatrica © 2012 Foundation Acta Paediatrica.

Reporting guidelines and journal quality in otolaryngology.

Science.gov (United States)

Henderson, A H; Upile, T; Pilavakis, Y; Patel, N N

2016-10-01

Journals increasingly use reporting guidelines to standardise research papers, partly to improve quality. Although defining journal quality is difficult, various calculated metrics are used. This study investigates guideline adoption by otolaryngology journals and whether a relationship exists between this and journal quality. Retrospective MEDLINE database review for English language, Index Medicus, journals of interest to otolaryngologists (October 2013). The resulting journals were examined for the number of guidelines endorsed and then tabulated against surrogate measures of journal quality (Impact factor, Eigenfactor, SCImago, Source-Normalised rank). The primary outcome measure was the number of recognised reporting guidelines endorsed per journal. This was then correlated against journal quality scores. For comparison, a further small sample correlation was performed with 6 randomly selected and 6 high-profile clinical non-otolaryngology journals. 37 otolaryngology journals were identified. Number of guidelines used and quality scores were not normally distributed. Mean guideline usage was 1.0 for otolaryngology journals, 1.5 for randomly selected, and 5.5 for the high-profile journals. Only 18/37 (49%) otolaryngology journals endorsed any guidelines, compared with 11/12 non-otolaryngology journals. Within otolaryngology, Eigenfactor positively correlated with guideline use (r = 0.4, n = 44, p otolaryngology journals is low. Although it might be expected that use of reporting guidelines improved quality, this is not reflected in the derived quality scores in otolaryngology. This may reflect low levels of use/enforcement, that quality indicators are inherently flawed, or that generalised guidelines are not always appropriate or valued by editors. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The scientific impact of nations: journal placement and citation performance.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Matthew J Smith

Full Text Available International collaboration is becoming increasingly important for the advancement of science. To gain a more precise understanding of how factors such as international collaboration influence publication success, we divide publication success into two categories: journal placement and citation performance. Analyzing all papers published between 1996 and 2012 in eight disciplines, we find that those with more countries in their affiliations performed better in both categories. Furthermore, specific countries vary in their effects both individually and in combination. Finally, we look at the relationship between national output (in papers published and input (in citations received over the 17 years, expanding upon prior depictions by also plotting an expected proportion of citations based on Journal Placement. Discrepancies between this expectation and the realized proportion of citations illuminate trends in performance, such as the decline of the Global North in response to rapidly developing countries, especially China. Yet, most countries' show little to no discrepancy, meaning that, in most cases, citation proportion can be predicted by Journal Placement alone. This reveals an extreme asymmetry between the opinions of a few reviewers and the degree to which paper acceptance and citation rates influence career advancement.

Globalization and Health: developing the journal to advance the field.

Science.gov (United States)

Martin, Greg; MacLachlan, Malcolm; Labonté, Ronald; Larkan, Fiona; Vallières, Frédérique; Bergin, Niamh

2016-03-09

Founded in 2005, Globalization and Health was the first open access global health journal. The journal has since expanded the field, and its influence, with the number of downloaded papers rising 17-fold, to over 4 million. Its ground-breaking papers, leading authors -including a Nobel Prize winner- and an impact factor of 2.25 place it among the top global health journals in the world. To mark the ten years since the journal's founding, we, members of the current editorial board, undertook a review of the journal's progress over the last decade. Through the application of an inductive thematic analysis, we systematically identified themes of research published in the journal from 2005 to 2014. We identify key areas the journal has promoted and consider these in the context of an existing framework, identify current gaps in global health research and highlight areas we, as a journal, would like to see strengthened.

Scientific Collaboration and Coauthors in Life Science Journal Articles

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ya-hsiu Fu

2002-12-01

Full Text Available It is common to conduct collaborative research in science and technology. In particular, the development of big science, Internet, and globalization facilitated the scientific collaboration. This study used two databases, Web of Science and Journal Citation Reports as data sources. From the analysis of 320 papers in 16 journals in life sciences, the results showed that there is no significant correlation between the impact factor of journals and the number of authors. Moreover, there is no correlation of authors and the cited times, either. The number of authors and cited times in most papers are under 10 persons and 25 times, respectively.[Article content in Chinese

Intervention Fidelity in Special and General Education Research Journals

Science.gov (United States)

Swanson, Elizabeth; Wanzek, Jeanne; Haring, Christa; Ciullo, Stephen; McCulley, Lisa

2013-01-01

Treatment fidelity reporting practices are described for journals that published general and special education intervention research with high impact factors from 2005 through 2009. The authors reviewed research articles, reported the proportion of intervention studies that described fidelity measurement, detailed the components of fidelity…

Open access to journal articles in oncology: current situation and citation impact.

Science.gov (United States)

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

CERN Library - Scientific journal cancellations

CERN Multimedia

2004-01-01

Due to the constant increase of the subscription costs of scientific journals and the current budget restrictions, the Scientific Information Policy Board has mandated the Working Group for Acquisitions (WGA) together with the Library to propose a list of titles to be cancelled at the end of 2004. As a first step, the WGA has identified the scientific journals listed at the web site below as candidates for cancellation. The choice has been guided by the personal experience of the WGA members, consultation of other expert CERN staff for highly specialized titles, and by criteria such as subscription price, impact factor, and - where available - access statistics for electronic journals. The list also accounts for the fact that many titles are subscribed to in 'packages' such that a cancellation of individual titles would not lead to any cost savings. We invite users to carefully check the list on the Library homepage (http://library.cern.ch/). If you find any title that you consider critically important for y...

Traditional Factors of Fit, Perceived Quality, and Speed of Publication Still Outweigh Open Access in Authors’ Journal Selection Criteria. A Review of: Solomon, D. J., & Björk, B.-C. (2012. Publication fees in open access publishing: Sources of funding and factors influencing choice of journal. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(1, 98-107. doi: 10.1002/asi.21660

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Michelle Dalton

2012-12-01

Full Text Available Objective – To determine the extent to whichthe open access (OA status of a journalinfluences authors in their journal selectiondecisions and to analyze the sources offunding for the article-processing charges(APCs applied in professional OA publishing.Design – Survey questionnaire.Setting – The international open accessscholarly publishing sector.Subjects – 1,038 researchers across allacademic disciplines who have recentlypublished work in open access journals thatcharge APCs.Methods – Journals listed in the Directory ofOpen Access Journals were stratified intoseven discipline clusters, and systematicrandom sampling was used where possible tocollect a sample of up to 15 journals per clusterthat levy APCs. For each individual journal,the authors of the 15 most recently publishedarticles (working from 2010 backwards wereinvited to complete a web-based questionnaireon the factors influencing their choice ofjournal and the source(s used to fundprocessing charges. Additional backgroundinformation about the authors and journalswas also collected and merged with the surveyresponses.Main Results – The results of the survey identified the fit of the article with the journal’s subject area, the perceived quality or impact of the journal, and the speed of the peer-review and publishing process as the dominant factors in the journal selection decision of authors. All three aspects were judged as either “very important” or “important” by 80% or more of respondents – significantly higher than the corresponding figure of 60% in relation to the open access status of the journal.The analysis also indicated that two key elements appear to influence how APCs are funded: the research discipline and the country of origin of the author. The use of research grants to fund charges is more prevalent in scientific disciplines than in the humanities, whilst researchers based in lower-income countries more frequently identify APCs as a barrier than

Authorship policies of scientific journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Resnik, David B; Tyler, Ana M; Black, Jennifer R; Kissling, Grace

2016-03-01

We analysed the authorship policies of a random sample of 600 journals from the Journal Citation Reports database. 62.5% of the journals we sampled had an authorship policy. Having an authorship policy was positively associated with impact factor. Journals from the biomedical sciences and social sciences/humanities were more likely to have an authorship policy than journals from the physical sciences, engineering or mathematical sciences. Among journals with a policy, the most frequent type of policy was guidance on criteria for authorship (99.7%); followed by guidance on acknowledgments (97.3%); requiring that authors make substantial contributions to the research (94.7%); requiring that authors be accountable for the research as a whole (84.8%); guidance on changes in authorship (77.9%); requiring that authors give final approval to the manuscript (77.6%); requiring that authors draft or critically revise the manuscript (71.7%); providing guidance on corporate authorship (58.9%); prohibiting gift, guest or ghost authorship (31.7%); requiring authors to describe their contributions (5.3%); limiting the number of authors for some types of articles (4.0%) and requiring authors to be accountable for their part in the research (1.1%). None of the policies addressed equal contribution statements. Journals that do not have authorship policies should consider adopting or developing ones. 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/

A Webometric Analysis of ISI Medical Journals Using Yahoo, AltaVista, and All the Web Search Engines

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Zohreh Zahedi

2010-12-01

Full Text Available The World Wide Web is an important information source for scholarly communications. Examining the inlinks via webometrics studies has attracted particular interests among information researchers. In this study, the number of inlinks to 69 ISI medical journals retrieved by Yahoo, AltaVista, and All The web Search Engines were examined via a comparative and Webometrics study. For data analysis, SPSS software was employed. Findings revealed that British Medical Journal website attracted the most links of all in the three search engines. There is a significant correlation between the number of External links and the ISI impact factor. The most significant correlation in the three search engines exists between external links of Yahoo and AltaVista (100% and the least correlation is found between external links of All The web & the number of pages of AltaVista (0.51. There is no significant difference between the internal links & the number of pages found by the three search engines. But in case of impact factors, significant differences are found between these three search engines. So, the study shows that journals with higher impact factor attract more links to their websites. It also indicates that the three search engines are significantly different in terms of total links, outlinks and web impact factors

Clinical trial registration in oral health journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Smaïl-Faugeron, V; Fron-Chabouis, H; Durieux, P

2015-03-01

Prospective registration of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represents the best solution to reporting bias. The extent to which oral health journals have endorsed and complied with RCT registration is unknown. We identified journals publishing RCTs in dentistry, oral surgery, and medicine in the Journal Citation Reports. We classified journals into 3 groups: journals requiring or recommending trial registration, journals referring indirectly to registration, and journals providing no reference to registration. For the 5 journals with the highest 2012 impact factors in each group, we assessed whether RCTs with results published in 2013 had been registered. Of 78 journals examined, 32 (41%) required or recommended trial registration, 19 (24%) referred indirectly to registration, and 27 (35%) provided no reference to registration. We identified 317 RCTs with results published in the 15 selected journals in 2013. Overall, 73 (23%) were registered in a trial registry. Among those, 91% were registered retrospectively and 32% did not report trial registration in the published article. The proportion of trials registered was not significantly associated with editorial policies: 29% with results in journals that required or recommended registration, 15% in those that referred indirectly to registration, and 21% in those providing no reference to registration (P = 0.05). Less than one-quarter of RCTs with results published in a sample of oral health journals were registered with a public registry. Improvements are needed with respect to how journals inform and require their authors to register their trials. © International & American Associations for Dental Research.

Scientific publications in nursing journals from Mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong: a 10-year survey of the literature.

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Development of obstetrical and gynecological journals, 2007 to 2013: a trend analysis.

Science.gov (United States)

Domröse, Christian M; Keyver-Paik, Mignon-Denise; Lorenzen, Henning; Kuhn, Walther C; Mallmann, Michael R

2016-02-01

To analyze the trends and developments among journals in the specialty of obstetrics and gynecology. Using the Journal Citation Reports from 2007 to 2013, we analyzed the impact factor (IF), Eigenfactor® Score (ES), and Article Influence® Score (AIS) of 43 journals in the field of obstetrics and gynecology published in this time period. From 78 journals of the Journal Citation Report 2013, 43 were selected for this study. The mean IF grew from 1.68 ± 0.97 in 2007 to 2.12 ± 1.05 in 2013, the ES from 0.0113 ± 0.0169 to 0.0114 ± 0.0140, and the AIS from 0.513 ± 0.302 to 0.663 ± 0.359. Differences in the IF, ES, and AIS between journals from the United States versus Europe could be observed. In most cases, the IF, ES, and AIS increased between 2007 and 2013. Strong correlations could be found between IF, AIS, and ES. The overall mean IF for obstetrical and gynecological journals increased over the analyzed time period. The IF remains the standard measure to compare scientific journals. It correlates well with two major alternative measures of scientific impact, the ES and especially the AIS. Other measures are evolving and might show superior usage in the future.

The evolution of academic performance in nine subspecialties of internal medicine: an analysis of journal citation reports from 1998 to 2010.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Yan Zhang

Full Text Available BACKGROUND: Internal medicine includes several subspecialties. This study aimed to describe change trend of impact factors in different subspecialties of internal medicine during the past 12 years, as well as the developmental differences among each subspecialty, and the possible influencing factors behind these changes and differences. METHODS: Nine subspecialties of internal medicine were chosen for comparison. All data were collected from the Science Citation Index Expanded and Journal Citation Reports database. RESULTS: (1 Journal numbers in nine subspecialties increased significantly from 1998 to 2010, with an average increment of 80.23%, in which cardiac and cardiovascular system diseases increased 131.2% rank the first; hematology increased 45% rank the least. (2 Impact Factor in subspecialties of infectious disease, cardiac and cardiovascular system diseases, gastroenterology and hepatology, hematology, endocrinology and metabolism increased significantly (p6, hematology had the maximum proportion of 10%, nephrology and respiratory system disease had the minimum of 4%. Among the journal with low impact factor (IF<2, journal in nephrology and allergy had the most (60%, while endocrinology and metabolism had the least (40%. There were differences in median number of IF among the different subspecialties (p<0.05, in which endocrinology and metabolism had the highest, nephrology had the lowest. (4 The highest IF had a correlation with journal numbers and total paper numbers in each field. CONCLUSION: The IF of internal medicine journals showed an increasingly positive trend, in which gastroenterology and hepatology increase the most. Hematology had more high IF journals. Endocrinology and metabolism had higher average IF. Nephrology remained the lowest position. Numbers of journals and total papers were associated with the highest IF.

In the Lead Again Horizontal-Ellipsis [Journal of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Vorwerk, Dierk, E-mail: dierk.vorwerk@klinikum-ingolstadt.de [Ingolstadt Hospital, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology (Germany)

2013-10-15

The 2013 ISI journal rankings are out and it is my pleasure to inform our readership that CVIR ranks 43/120 (2012: 46/118) journals in the field of radiology. The 2013 impact factor further improved to 2.138 (2012: 2.093). This means that Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology again continues to be the highest ranked journal dedicated to the field of interventional radiology in 2013.This is mainly due to the great support we achieve by you as authors and readers of CVIR, your dedication to the profession, and your loyalty both to the journal and to CIRSE. For all of this, we owe you our thanks and respect.

Ranking Journals Using Social Choice Theory Methods: A Novel Approach in Bibliometrics

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Aleskerov, F.T.; Pislyakov, V.; Subochev, A.N.

2016-07-01

We use data on economic, management and political science journals to produce quantitative estimates of (in)consistency of evaluations based on seven popular bibliometric indica (impact factor, 5-year impact factor, immediacy index, article influence score, h-index, SNIP and SJR). We propose a new approach to aggregating journal rankings: since rank aggregation is a multicriteria decision problem, ordinal ranking methods from social choice theory may solve it. We apply either a direct ranking method based on majority rule (the Copeland rule, the Markovian method) or a sorting procedure based on a tournament solution, such as the uncovered set and the minimal externally stable set. We demonstrate that aggregate rankings reduce the number of contradictions and represent the set of single-indicator-based rankings better than any of the seven rankings themselves. (Author)

Re-launch of Phytocoenologia: new profile for the classic vegetation ecology journal

Czech Academy of Sciences Publication Activity Database

Bergmeier, E.; Dengler, J.; Janišová, M.; Jansen, F.; Krestov, P.; Roleček, Jan; Walker, D. A.; Willner, W.

2015-01-01

Roč. 45, 1-2 (2015), s. 1-10 ISSN 0340-269X Institutional support: RVO:67985939 Keywords : vegetation classification * new journal policy * editorial Subject RIV: EH - Ecology, Behaviour Impact factor: 1.828, year: 2015

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Content Analysis of the Papers in 2015 High-Impact A-Class SSCI Journals

Science.gov (United States)

Ay, Sule; Sahin, Seyma; Okmen, Burcu; Incirci, Ayhan

2016-01-01

It was aimed in this study to reveal the general tendency of studies in the field of education by examining the papers in the high-impact A-class SSCI journals, to which qualified papers are accepted from all around the world, in terms of their dependent-independent variables, sample or study groups, research designs, data collection instruments,…

The influence of Iranian scientific journals in disseminating medical information.

Science.gov (United States)

Aminpour, Farzaneh

2012-02-01

Scientific journals are the most credible and updated information resources for valid information in the various fields of science and technology. The present study investigates the status of Iranian scientific journals in disseminating medical information to the world of science. Total 163 Iranian medical journals accredited by national medical journals commission of Iranian ministry of health and medical education were evaluated through a cross-sectional study. The results were represented in descriptive statistics in the form of table and chart. The study showed that 89.6% of Iranian medical journals were covered by regional information databases. Web of Science database indexed 22 (13.5%) Iranian journals in the field of medical science. Only six (6.7%) journals were indexed by Medline. Fifty-eight (35.6%) journals were in English, 102 (62.6%) in Persian, and three (1.8%) were bilingual which published their articles both in Persian and English languages. The highest Impact factor belonged to Iranian Journal of Allergy Asthma and Immunology. Improving scientific credibility of Iranian scholarly journals and their influence in disseminating medical information calls for a precise scientific and executive administration in publishing standards and also in the quality of content.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Neophilia Ranking of Scientific Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Packalen, Mikko; Bhattacharya, Jay

2017-01-01

The ranking of scientific journals is important because of the signal it sends to scientists about what is considered most vital for scientific progress. Existing ranking systems focus on measuring the influence of a scientific paper (citations)-these rankings do not reward journals for publishing innovative work that builds on new ideas. We propose an alternative ranking based on the proclivity of journals to publish papers that build on new ideas, and we implement this ranking via a text-based analysis of all published biomedical papers dating back to 1946. In addition, we compare our neophilia ranking to citation-based (impact factor) rankings; this comparison shows that the two ranking approaches are distinct. Prior theoretical work suggests an active role for our neophilia index in science policy. Absent an explicit incentive to pursue novel science, scientists underinvest in innovative work because of a coordination problem: for work on a new idea to flourish, many scientists must decide to adopt it in their work. Rankings that are based purely on influence thus do not provide sufficient incentives for publishing innovative work. By contrast, adoption of the neophilia index as part of journal-ranking procedures by funding agencies and university administrators would provide an explicit incentive for journals to publish innovative work and thus help solve the coordination problem by increasing scientists' incentives to pursue innovative work.

The impact of dermatology in premier medicine journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Kheterpal, Meenal K; Ellis, Charles N

2011-01-01

In the past 15 years, research in dermatology has significantly increased. Dermatology-related contributions in premier medical journals such as The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) are the representation of our field in the medical world. To analyze this representation, incidence of dermatology-related contributions in NEJM and JAMA during 3 separate years (during a 15-year period) was calculated.

AJEMS - a new journal

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Kuada, John

2010-01-01

African Journal of Economic and Management Studies (AJEMS) provides an avenue for disseminating empirical research results, as well as theoretical viewpoints and methodologies that could impact positively on economic and business activities in Africa.......African Journal of Economic and Management Studies (AJEMS) provides an avenue for disseminating empirical research results, as well as theoretical viewpoints and methodologies that could impact positively on economic and business activities in Africa....

[The impact factor of Nutrición Hospitalaria is 1.096].

Science.gov (United States)

Culebras, J M; García de Lorenzo, A

2009-01-01

The editors of Nutrición Hospitalaria (Nutr Hosp) analyze the journal from its foundation in 1979 to the present time, on occasion of the first publication of its impact factorby Journal Citation Reports (JCR). The actions taken along this thirty year period are described, including its incorporation to multiple web databases, the Open Access policy of the journal, its progressive internationality, and the bibliometric analysis made in 1999. A figure with the journal citation trends is included. Nutr Hosp, included in the "Nutrition & Dietetics" group of JCR, is in the position 42/59, i.e. in the third quartile. Among the Spanish journals included in JCR,Nutr Hosp is located in the 14/37 position. A few considerations are made related to the economical aspects of the journal, the number of articles received so far, the articles expected in the future, the rejection rate and the language (Spanish or English) in which Nutr Hosp should be published.

Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high-impact medical journals in China: a survey of instructions for authors and published papers.

Science.gov (United States)

Li, Xiao-qian; Tao, Kun-ming; Zhou, Qing-hui; Moher, David; Chen, Hong-yun; Wang, Fu-zhe; Ling, Chang-quan

2012-01-01

The CONSORT Statement is a reporting guideline for authors when reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs). It offers a standard way for authors to prepare RCT reports. It has been endorsed by many high-impact medical journals and by international editorial groups. This study was conducted to assess the endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high-impact medical journals in China by reviewing their instructions for authors. A total of 200 medical journals were selected according to the Chinese Science and Technology Journal Citation Reports, 195 of which publish clinical research papers. Their instructions for authors were reviewed and all texts mentioning the CONSORT Statement or CONSORT extension papers were extracted. Any mention of the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (URM) developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) or 'clinical trial registration' was also extracted. For journals endorsing the CONSORT Statement, their most recently published RCT reports were retrieved and evaluated to assess whether the journals have followed what the CONSORT Statement required. Out of the 195 medical journals publishing clinical research papers, only six (6/195, 3.08%) mentioned 'CONSORT' in their instructions for authors; out of the 200 medical journals surveyed, only 14 (14/200, 7.00%) mentioned 'ICMJE' or 'URM' in their instructions for authors, and another five journals stated in their instructions for authors that clinical trials should have trial registration numbers and that priority would be given to clinical trials which had been registered. Among the 62 RCT reports published in the six journals endorsing the CONSORT Statement, 20 (20/62, 32.26%) contained flow diagrams and only three (3/62, 4.84%) provided trial registration information. Medical journals in China endorsing either the CONSORT Statement or the ICMJE's URM constituted a small percentage of the total; all of these journals used

The year 2014 in the European Heart Journal – Cardiovascular Imaging. Part I.

Science.gov (United States)

Edvardsen, Thor; Bucciarelli-Ducci, Chiara; Saraste, Antti; Pierard, Luc A; Knuuti, Juhani; Maurer, Gerald; Habib, Gilbert; Lancellotti, Patrizio

2015-07-01

The new multimodality cardiovascular imaging journal, European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging, was created in 2012. It has already gained an impressive impact factor of 3.669 during its first 2 years. In two articles, we will summarize the most important studies from the journal's third year. Part I of the review will focus on studies in myocardial function, myocardial ischaemia, and emerging techniques in cardiovascular imaging, and Part II will focus on valvular heart diseases, heart failure, cardiomyopathies, and congenital heart diseases. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2015. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

The differential impact of scientific quality, bibliometric factors, and social media activity on the influence of systematic reviews and meta-analyses about psoriasis.

Science.gov (United States)

Ruano, Juan; Aguilar-Luque, Macarena; Gómez-Garcia, Francisco; Alcalde Mellado, Patricia; Gay-Mimbrera, Jesus; Carmona-Fernandez, Pedro J; Maestre-López, Beatriz; Sanz-Cabanillas, Juan Luís; Hernández Romero, José Luís; González-Padilla, Marcelino; Vélez García-Nieto, Antonio; Isla-Tejera, Beatriz

2018-01-01

Researchers are increasingly using on line social networks to promote their work. Some authors have suggested that measuring social media activity can predict the impact of a primary study (i.e., whether or not an article will be highly cited). However, the influence of variables such as scientific quality, research disclosures, and journal characteristics on systematic reviews and meta-analyses has not yet been assessed. The present study aims to describe the effect of complex interactions between bibliometric factors and social media activity on the impact of systematic reviews and meta-analyses about psoriasis (PROSPERO 2016: CRD42016053181). Methodological quality was assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool. Altmetrics, which consider Twitter, Facebook, and Google+ mention counts as well as Mendeley and SCOPUS readers, and corresponding article citation counts from Google Scholar were obtained for each article. Metadata and journal-related bibliometric indices were also obtained. One-hundred and sixty-four reviews with available altmetrics information were included in the final multifactorial analysis, which showed that social media and impact factor have less effect than Mendeley and SCOPUS readers on the number of cites that appear in Google Scholar. Although a journal's impact factor predicted the number of tweets (OR, 1.202; 95% CI, 1.087-1.049), the years of publication and the number of Mendeley readers predicted the number of citations in Google Scholar (OR, 1.033; 95% CI, 1.018-1.329). Finally, methodological quality was related neither with bibliometric influence nor social media activity for systematic reviews. In conclusion, there seems to be a lack of connectivity between scientific quality, social media activity, and article usage, thus predicting scientific success based on these variables may be inappropriate in the particular case of systematic reviews.

A Citation Data Analysis of JCR-Covered Journals in Geosciences

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Shengli Ren、Ronald Rousseau

2002-04-01

Full Text Available

頁次：4-13

This article describes some indicators provided by ISI’s Journal Citation Reports (edition 1998 for the field of geosciences. This field is subdivided in twenty categories. Average values of the journal impact factor, total number of citations, immediacy index, and the number of source items are given and discussed. It is concluded that these indicators have lower values than the average journals covered by the JCR.

Scientific publications in pharmacology and pharmacy journals from Chinese authors in various parts of North Asia: a 10-year survey of the literature.

Science.gov (United States)

Li, G; Hu, L-H; Liao, Z; Cui, H-C; Li, Z-S

2010-01-01

The amount and quality of pharmacology and pharmacy research by authors from China was investigated by comparing published articles from 136 international journals (1998 - 2007) by authors from mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. The number of articles, clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, case reports, impact factors, number of citations and number of articles published in top general medicine journals were compared. The total number of articles increased significantly between 1998 and 2007 (from 324 to 2536 per year). In total, there were 12 021 articles: 7576 from mainland China, 3267 from Taiwan and 1178 from Hong Kong. The accumulated impact factor of the articles from mainland China (16 688.94) was much higher than for those from Taiwan (8726.92) and Hong Kong (3161.22) but, among the three regions, Hong Kong had the highest mean impact factor and the most articles published in top general medicine journals.

Scientific publications in nursing journals from Mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong: a 10-year survey of the literature

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Di Zhang

2016-03-01

Full Text Available Background: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Discussion: 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.

Bibliometric Analysis of the Journal Kemija u industriji for the Period 2000–2009

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Macan, B.

2011-02-01

Full Text Available This paper deals with a bibliometric analysis of journal Kemija u industriji for the period 2000–2009. The results of the analysis show that the journal is still dealing with the problem of publishing scientific papers, which was also detected in a previous similar analysis (M. Jokia et al. (2002. Furthermore, in 82.1 % of categorized papers at least one author is from Croatia, while in 88.4 % at least one author is from neighboring countries (Croatia and other ex-Yugoslavia countries. This data reveals the strong national and regional orientation of the journal, which can be related with the language of publishing (mostly Croatian – 76.4 %, as well as with one of the basic functions of the journal according to its mission, which is to develop and improve chemistry and engineering terminology and nomenclature in the Croatian language. Journal citation analysis is based on the citation data gathered from the bibliographic and citation databases Scopus and Web of Science (WoS. Still, according to the specific bibliometric journal indicators(Impact Factor (IF, SCImago Journal Rank (SJR and Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP, the analysis shows that Kemija u industriji could find its place among other related world journals.

Is quality and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in high impact radiology journals associated with citation rates?

Science.gov (United States)

van der Pol, Christian B; McInnes, Matthew D F; Petrcich, William; Tunis, Adam S; Hanna, Ramez

2015-01-01

The purpose of this study is to determine whether study quality and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) published in high impact factor (IF) radiology journals is associated with citation rates. All SR and MA published in English between Jan 2007-Dec 2011, in radiology journals with an IF >2.75, were identified on Ovid MEDLINE. The Assessing the Methodologic Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist for study quality, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist for study completeness, was applied to each SR & MA. Each SR & MA was then searched in Google Scholar to yield a citation rate. Spearman correlation coefficients were used to assess the relationship between AMSTAR and PRISMA results with citation rate. Multivariate analyses were performed to account for the effect of journal IF and journal 5-year IF on correlation with citation rate. Values were reported as medians with interquartile range (IQR) provided. 129 studies from 11 journals were included (50 SR and 79 MA). Median AMSTAR result was 8.0/11 (IQR: 5-9) and median PRISMA result was 23.0/27 (IQR: 21-25). The median citation rate for SR & MA was 0.73 citations/month post-publication (IQR: 0.40-1.17). There was a positive correlation between both AMSTAR and PRISMA results and SR & MA citation rate; ρ=0.323 (P=0.0002) and ρ=0.327 (P=0.0002) respectively. Positive correlation persisted for AMSTAR and PRISMA results after journal IF was partialed out; ρ=0.243 (P=0.006) and ρ=0.256 (P=0.004), and after journal 5-year IF was partialed out; ρ=0.235 (P=0.008) and ρ=0.243 (P=0.006) respectively. There is a positive correlation between the quality and the completeness of a reported SR or MA with citation rate which persists when adjusted for journal IF and journal 5-year IF.

The impact of environmental factors on carbon dioxide fixation by microalgae.

Science.gov (United States)

Morales, Marcia; Sánchez, León; Revah, Sergio

2018-02-01

Microalgae are among the most productive biological systems for converting sunlight into chemical energy, which is used to capture and transform inorganic carbon into biomass. The efficiency of carbon dioxide capture depends on the cultivation system configuration (photobioreactors or open systems) and can vary according to the state of the algal physiology, the chemical composition of the nutrient medium, and environmental factors such as irradiance, temperature and pH. This mini-review is focused on some of the most important environmental factors determining photosynthetic activity, carbon dioxide biofixation, cell growth rate and biomass productivity by microalgae. These include carbon dioxide and O2 concentrations, light intensity, cultivation temperature and nutrients. Finally, a review of the operation of microalgal cultivation systems outdoors is presented as an example of the impact of environmental conditions on biomass productivity and carbon dioxide fixation. © FEMS 2017. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high-impact medical journals in China: a survey of instructions for authors and published papers.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Xiao-qian Li

Full Text Available BACKGROUND: The CONSORT Statement is a reporting guideline for authors when reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs. It offers a standard way for authors to prepare RCT reports. It has been endorsed by many high-impact medical journals and by international editorial groups. This study was conducted to assess the endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high-impact medical journals in China by reviewing their instructions for authors. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A total of 200 medical journals were selected according to the Chinese Science and Technology Journal Citation Reports, 195 of which publish clinical research papers. Their instructions for authors were reviewed and all texts mentioning the CONSORT Statement or CONSORT extension papers were extracted. Any mention of the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (URM developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE or 'clinical trial registration' was also extracted. For journals endorsing the CONSORT Statement, their most recently published RCT reports were retrieved and evaluated to assess whether the journals have followed what the CONSORT Statement required. Out of the 195 medical journals publishing clinical research papers, only six (6/195, 3.08% mentioned 'CONSORT' in their instructions for authors; out of the 200 medical journals surveyed, only 14 (14/200, 7.00% mentioned 'ICMJE' or 'URM' in their instructions for authors, and another five journals stated in their instructions for authors that clinical trials should have trial registration numbers and that priority would be given to clinical trials which had been registered. Among the 62 RCT reports published in the six journals endorsing the CONSORT Statement, 20 (20/62, 32.26% contained flow diagrams and only three (3/62, 4.84% provided trial registration information. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Medical journals in China endorsing either the CONSORT Statement or the

Quality of reporting in infertility journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Glujovsky, Demian; Boggino, Carolina; Riestra, Barbara; Coscia, Andrea; Sueldo, Carlos E; Ciapponi, Agustín

2015-01-01

To evaluate whether fertility and top gynecology journals indexed in PubMed require the use of reporting guidelines and to identify the percentage of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in 2013 that were written following CONSORT guidelines in the top four fertility journals (by their highest impact factor). Cross-sectional study evaluating instructions for authors and RCTs published in fertility journals. Academic institution. None. None. Proportion of instruction-for-authors documents that suggested or required the use of reporting guidelines, and proportion of RCTs published in 2013 that accomplished the CONSORT checklist. In 47% (16/34) of the journals one or more reporting guidelines were mentioned in the instructions for authors' documents. PRISMA and CONSORT were the most commonly mentioned reporting guidelines. None of the analyzed RCTs completed the 25 items of CONSORT guideline. Sequence generation or allocation concealment was not described in 69% of the studies. One-third of the journals did not publish a flowchart, 72% did not show relative and absolute size-effect measures, and 42% did not use measures of imprecision. In the summaries, 42% did not discuss the limitations of the study and 78% did not mention the generalizability of the results. Less than half of the analyzed peer-reviewed journals request the authors to use reporting guidelines. Nevertheless, among the top fertility and gynecology journals, reporting guidelines are widely mentioned. Overall, accomplishment of CONSORT items was suboptimal. Editorial boards, reviewers, and authors should join efforts to improve the quality of reporting. Copyright © 2015 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Forests: An International and Interdisciplinary Scientific Open Access Journal

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Eric J. Jokela

2014-01-01

Full Text Available Forests was established to provide comprehensive coverage on the ecology, conservation and management of forests, with the first issue published in March 2010. As an international and multi-disciplinary journal, Forests has provided a forum for publishing process–based and applied scholarly articles that span the technological, environmental, cultural, economic, and social realm associated with the management, use, conservation, and understanding of forested ecosystems. By all accounts, Forests is well poised toward becoming a premier publication outlet in this diverse field of study. In its short tenure, Forests received its first Impact Factor in 2013 (1.094—Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE/Web of Science, which placed it 25th out of 62 Forestry journals. Notably, Forests ranked first among the open access journals in this category.

Transitioning from a Conventional to a ‘Mega’ Journal: A Bibliometric Case Study of the Journal Medicine

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Simon Wakeling

2017-04-01

Full Text Available Open-Access Mega-Journals (OAMJs are a relatively new and increasingly important publishing phenomenon. The journal Medicine is in the unique position of having transitioned in 2014 from being a ‘traditional’ highly-selective journal to the OAMJ model. This study compares the bibliometric profile of the journal Medicine before and after its transition to the OAMJ model. Three standard modes of bibliometric analysis are employed, based on data from Web of Science: journal output volume, author characteristics, and citation analysis. The journal’s article output is seen to have grown hugely since its conversion to an OAMJ, a rise driven in large part by authors from China. Articles published since 2015 have fewer citations, and are cited by lower impact journals than articles published before the OAMJ transition. The adoption of the OAMJ model has completely changed the bibliometric profile of the journal, raising questions about the impact of OAMJ peer-review practices. In many respects, the post-2014 version of Medicine is best viewed as a new journal rather than a continuation of the original title.

How Multidisciplinary Are the Multidisciplinary Journals Science and Nature?

Science.gov (United States)

Solomon, Gregg E A; Carley, Stephen; Porter, Alan L

2016-01-01

Interest in cross-disciplinary research knowledge interchange runs high. Review processes at funding agencies, such as the U.S. National Science Foundation, consider plans to disseminate research across disciplinary bounds. Publication in the leading multidisciplinary journals, Nature and Science, may signify the epitome of successful interdisciplinary integration of research knowledge and cross-disciplinary dissemination of findings. But how interdisciplinary are they? The journals are multidisciplinary, but do the individual articles themselves draw upon multiple fields of knowledge and does their influence span disciplines? This research compares articles in three fields (Cell Biology, Physical Chemistry, and Cognitive Science) published in a leading disciplinary journal in each field to those published in Nature and Science. We find comparable degrees of interdisciplinary integration and only modest differences in cross-disciplinary diffusion. That said, though the rate of out-of-field diffusion might be comparable, the sheer reach of Nature and Science, indicated by their potent Journal Impact Factors, means that the diffusion of knowledge therein can far exceed that of leading disciplinary journals in some fields (such as Physical Chemistry and Cognitive Science in our samples).

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

Science.gov (United States)

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.

Are Study and Journal Characteristics Reliable Indicators of "Truth" in Imaging Research?

Science.gov (United States)

Frank, Robert A; McInnes, Matthew D F; Levine, Deborah; Kressel, Herbert Y; Jesurum, Julia S; Petrcich, William; McGrath, Trevor A; Bossuyt, Patrick M

2018-04-01

Purpose To evaluate whether journal-level variables (impact factor, cited half-life, and Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies [STARD] endorsement) and study-level variables (citation rate, timing of publication, and order of publication) are associated with the distance between primary study results and summary estimates from meta-analyses. Materials and Methods MEDLINE was searched for meta-analyses of imaging diagnostic accuracy studies, published from January 2005 to April 2016. Data on journal-level and primary-study variables were extracted for each meta-analysis. Primary studies were dichotomized by variable as first versus subsequent publication, publication before versus after STARD introduction, STARD endorsement, or by median split. The mean absolute deviation of primary study estimates from the corresponding summary estimates for sensitivity and specificity was compared between groups. Means and confidence intervals were obtained by using bootstrap resampling; P values were calculated by using a t test. Results Ninety-eight meta-analyses summarizing 1458 primary studies met the inclusion criteria. There was substantial variability, but no significant differences, in deviations from the summary estimate between paired groups (P > .0041 in all comparisons). The largest difference found was in mean deviation for sensitivity, which was observed for publication timing, where studies published first on a topic demonstrated a mean deviation that was 2.5 percentage points smaller than subsequently published studies (P = .005). For journal-level factors, the greatest difference found (1.8 percentage points; P = .088) was in mean deviation for sensitivity in journals with impact factors above the median compared with those below the median. Conclusion Journal- and study-level variables considered important when evaluating diagnostic accuracy information to guide clinical decisions are not systematically associated with distance from the truth

Scientific and academic journals in the Philippines: status and challenges

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Evelyn Mae Tecson-Mendoza

2015-08-01

Full Text Available As of July 2015, 28 Philippine scientific journals out of 777 Philippine scholarly journals are listed in the master journal lists of Thomson Reuters (TR, Scopus, or both. Of these scientific journals, thirteen are published by universities, two by government institutions, ten by professional organizations and three by private for-profit or non-profit organizations. Nineteen of these journals are over 25 years old, with the Philippine Journal of Science and the Philippine Agricultural Scientist being the oldest at 108 and 103 years in publication, respectively. Scientific journals in the Philippines, like other countries in Asia, face various increasing challenges. Among these challenges are getting listed in the master journal lists and citation databases of TR, Scopus, or both; obtaining funding; reaching a wider readership; attaining higher impact factors; competing for papers; and increased submission of manuscripts from outside the country. To promote the improvement of local journals, the National Academy of Science and Technology Philippines has given outstanding publication awards for scientific papers published in local journals for the past two decades. The Philippine Commission on Higher Education has accredited local journals that are included in either TR and Scopus journal master lists, and provides monetary incentives to accredited journals. Training workshops on scientific article writing and editorial management are conducted for researchers and editors by universities and professional and government organizations. A network of Philippine science editors has been formed to work together to upgrade and modernize selected journals to international standards.

Conversion rates of abstracts presented at the Canadian Rheumatology Association Annual Meetings into full-text journal articles.

Science.gov (United States)

Yacyshyn, Elaine A; Soong, Laura C

2017-06-01

Dissemination of research studies is important for research ideas to be transformed from initial abstracts to full publications. Analyses of the scientific impact and publication record of the Canadian Rheumatology Association (CRA) Annual meeting have not been previously described. This study determines the publication rate of abstracts presented at the CRA Annual Meetings 2005-2013 to full-text journal articles and the factors associated with publication. Program records of previous CRA meetings from 2005 to 2013 were obtained. Abstracts were searched for corresponding full-text publication in Google Scholar and PubMed using a search algorithm. Abstracts and subsequent published articles were evaluated for type of abstract, time to publication, study type, publishing journal, and journal impact factor. A total of 1401 abstracts were included in the study, 567 of which were converted to full publications. The average time to publication was 19.7 months, with 89% of abstracts published within 3 years of being presented. Eighty-three percent of abstracts were clinical in nature, and 58% of published studies were observational in design. Articles were published in a wide range of journals, with the top publisher being the Journal of Rheumatology (31%). Average time to publication was 19.7 months. Eighty-six percent of articles had a Journal Impact Factor > 2. Overall, 40.5% of abstracts presented at the CRA Annual Meetings 2005-2013 were published. Further research is needed to determine barriers and reasons for abstracts not being published as full-text articles.

An Evaluation on the Contribution of Journals Published by SSCI to the Area of Public Administration

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ecem SEVİNÇ

2015-07-01

Full Text Available Citation indexes are regarded as important factors to make an effective literature review. Since the publication on the SSCI has been a requirement for the academic degrees in Turkey, the value of scientific articles published in citation indexes has increased. Therefore, bibliometric values and the topic distribution of journals published in a specific discipline are of great importance especially for academicians working in the related discipline. This study will select ten journals that have the highest value of 5-year impact factor in the 2013 JCR among the journals published in Public Administration in SSCI and examine their quantitative and qualitative values. As a result of the research, it is intended to generate benefits for researchers that will work in the discipline of Public Administration through specifying the most contributing journals to the field and presenting subject headings and the distribution of topics in the selected journals.

Tendency towards the Self-Citation among Journals in Iran and Turkey / İran ve Türkiye Dergilerinde Kendine Atıf Yapma Eğilimleri

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Mohammad Hossein Biglu

2007-10-01

Full Text Available AbstractThis paper investigates the trends of Impact Factors and self-citation rates of journals indexed in the JCR by two neighbouring countries Iran and Turkey for a period of five years (2000- 2005. All data extracted from the Journal Citation Reports – Science Edition (2000-2005. The study showed that the portion of Turkish journals entering data to the JCR data bank is two times higher than the portion of Iranian journals. From a total number of 6,088 journals in the JCR in 2005, 3 (0.05% were published in Iran and the same number of journals published in Turkey. The 6,088 journals in the JCR produced 847,114 articles, 159 (0.02% appeared in the Iranian journals and 352 (0.04% in the Turkish journals. Of the 22,353,992 citations in 2005, 214 (0.001% came from Iranian journals and 911 (0.004% came from Turkish journals.The self-citation tendency by Iranian journals has increased dramatically throughout the period of study, it reached from 8% self-citation rate in 2000 to 18% in 2005, an increase of 2.25 times, whereas the self-citation rate by Turkish journals showed a negative trend, its self-citation rate fell from 22% in 2002 to 15% in 2005. The Impact Factors of Turkish journals showed faster growth than the Iranian journals, the mean value of Impact Factor for Turkish journals in 2000 was 0.49 under than the mean value of Impact Factor for Iranian journals, but in 2005 the mean value of Impact Factor for Turkish journals stayed 0.14 higher than the mean value of Impact Factor for Iranian journalsÖzBu makale, iki komşu ülke, İran ve Türkiye tarafından 5 yıl (2000-2005 içinde üretilen yayınlardan JCR’de dizinlenen dergilerdeki kendine atıfları ve etki faktöründeki eğilimleri incelemektedir. Bütün veriler JCR-Science Edition (2000-2005’den alınmıştır. Çalışma, Türk dergilerinin İran dergilerinden iki kat fazla miktarda JCR’ye girdiğini göstermektedir. 2005 yılında JCR’de yer alan toplam 6

Bias and other limitations affect measures of journals in integrative and complementary medicineKa-wai Fan, PhD.

Science.gov (United States)

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.

The European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine in 2008: a year in a paper.

Science.gov (United States)

Negrini, S

2009-05-01

In 2007, the European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM) established the European Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Journal Network (EPRMJN) with a view to increase scientific knowledge among physical and rehabilitation medicine (PRM) specialists and to foster collaboration among the national, regional (multinational) and European PRM journals. In this connection, this paper gives the readers of national and regional, and European PRM journals a complete overview of the European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EJPRM), the official ESPRM journal, and a review of the papers published in 2008. The evolution of the EJPRM in the last five years was analyzed, and the papers published in 2008 were systematically reviewed and classified by content and discussed. The EJPRM is listed in PubMed and Current Contents; at now the unofficial 2008 Impact Factor is 1.14, like the Impact Factor, also the independent SCImago Journal Rate and Cites per Doc (two years) have increased steadily since 2005. The EJPRM published 72 papers in 2008, with a well balanced coverage of different rehabilitation topics. The rejection rate is around 40%; the review and publication times are 1.2 and 10.0 months, respectively. The published papers are presented here by topic, highlighting multi-journal initiatives (such as the EPRMJN and the Euro-American Focus with the American Journal of PRM), monographic Special Sections, systematic Cochrane PRM reviews, original papers and case reports, and other contents including the Internet Bookshelf. This paper represents the start of the EPRMJN collaborative efforts to increase scientific knowledge among PRM specialists in Europe, independently of the language in which papers are published.

Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Journal Home > Vol 28, No 3 (2018) ... Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences is a general health science journal addressing clinical medicine, ... Postnatal Care Utilization and Associated Factors among Married Women in Benchi-Maji Zone, ...

Publication productivity of Czech sociology in scientific journals within the last decade

Czech Academy of Sciences Publication Activity Database

Basl, J.; Münich, D.; Sidorkin, Oleg

-, č. 392 (2009), s. 1-41 ISSN 1211-3298 R&D Projects: GA MŠk(CZ) LC542 Institutional research plan: CEZ:MSM0021620846 Keywords : Czech sociology * research * journals with impact factor Subject RIV: AH - Economics http://www.cerge-ei.cz/pdf/wp/Wp392.pdf

Research Data in Core Journals in Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics, and Physics.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ryan P Womack

Full Text Available This study takes a stratified random sample of articles published in 2014 from the top 10 journals in the disciplines of biology, chemistry, mathematics, and physics, as ranked by impact factor. Sampled articles were examined for their reporting of original data or reuse of prior data, and were coded for whether the data was publicly shared or otherwise made available to readers. Other characteristics such as the sharing of software code used for analysis and use of data citation and DOIs for data were examined. The study finds that data sharing practices are still relatively rare in these disciplines' top journals, but that the disciplines have markedly different practices. Biology top journals share original data at the highest rate, and physics top journals share at the lowest rate. Overall, the study finds that within the top journals, only 13% of articles with original data published in 2014 make the data available to others.

圖書資訊領域期刊引用影響之結構方程模式分析 The Structural Equation Analysis on the Journal Citation Impact in the Field of Library and Information Science

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Yuan-Ho Huang

2007-03-01

Full Text Available 本研究提出一個測量期刊引用影響的整合式概念模型，並應用結構方程模式方法在圖書資訊學相關領域的50種期刊資訊進行以「期刊屬性」、「期刊易取性」及「期刊多樣性」等三項為「期刊引用」的前置因素理論模型的實證。整體模型的可解釋變異量為39.4%，其中測量模型的結果：以文獻篇數測量「期刊屬性」，以文件獲取性測量「期刊易取性」，及主題多樣化來測量「期刊多樣性」具顯著效果；而影響係數、立即指數及全部引用數來測量「期刊引用」，則均具顯著效果。結構模型的結果：「期刊引用」受到「期刊多樣性」的影響，但「期刊屬性」與「期刊易取性」則不具顯著性影響。The study proposes an integrated conceptual model to assess the journal citation impact. The antecedent factors include journal attributes, journal accessibility, and journal diversity. The structural equation modeling (SEM with partial least square (PLS is applied to conduct the empirical study within the fifty journals in the field of library and information science. The result shows that the antecedent factors account for 39.4% of the variance in journal citation. The result of measurement model shows that the number of articles is a good indicator for journal attributes; document availability is a good indicator for journal accessibility; and subject variety is a good indicator for journal diversity. As for the journal citation, three indicators include impact factor, immediacy index, and total citations are all good indicators. Moreover, the result of structural model shows that journal citation is significantly influenced by journal diversity, while there is no significant effect of journal attributes and journal accessibility.

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

Science.gov (United States)

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…

Electronic journals and scholarly communication: a citation and reference study

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Stephen P. Harter

1996-01-01

Full Text Available The journal is fundamental to formal scholarly communication. This research reports highlights and preliminary findings from an empirical study of scholarly electronic journals. The purpose of the research is to assess the impact of electronic journals (e-journals on scholarly communication, by measuring the extent to which they are being cited in the literature, both print and electronic. The intent is to provide a snapshot of the impact e-journals were having on scholarly communication at a given point in time, roughly the end of 1995. This study provides one measure of that impact, specifically on the formal, as opposed to informal, communication process. The study also examines the forms in which scholars cite e-journals, the accuracy and completeness of citations to e-journals, and practical difficulties faced by scholars and researchers who wish to retrieve e-journals through the networks.

A retrospective analysis of reported errata in five leading medical journals in 2012

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Vijaya R. Bhatt

2014-11-01

Full Text Available Background: Although medical publications are frequently used as the source of information, the prevalence of errata remains unclear. The objective of this study was to examine peer-review and publication processes of medical journals as well as to determine the occurrence of reported errata in medical journals and timeliness in identifying and correcting errata. Methods: Five medical journals, New England Journal of Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal, Journal of American Medical Association, and Lancet, were evaluated. The characteristics of these journals were obtained from editors’ survey. All these journals report errata noted in their prior publications. We retrospectively analyzed all errata reported from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2012. The mean number of reported errata per issue, the most common errata, and the mean time to report errata were calculated. Results: The journals had high impact factors (14–51, received 3,200 to more than 15,000 submissions in 2012, and utilized two or more external reviewers and usually two or more editors for any accepted articles. All the journals edited the accepted articles, including references, figures, and tables for style. A mean of 1.3 articles with ≥1 errata was reported per issue (a total of 306 articles with errata in 226 issues. Errata in author's information, numeric errata, and errata in the figures and tables were the most common errata. The mean time to report the errata was 122 days. Conclusion: The high-impact journals, with extensive pre-publication review, reported relatively few errata per issue. The delay in reporting errata needs further exploration.

Reflections on the Journal of Applied Psychology for 2009 to 2014: Infrastructure, operations, innovations, impact, evolution, and desirable directions.

Science.gov (United States)

Kozlowski, Steve W J

2017-03-01

In this reflection on my experiences as editor of the Journal of Applied Psychology , I consider 6 foci including (a) information on the background, infrastructure, and mechanics of running this top-tier journal; (b) statistics on journal operations across the 7 years of editorial activity (i.e., incoming plus 6 years on the masthead); (c) innovations that my senior editorial team introduced (i.e., transparency via supplemental materials, revival of monographs, initiation of integrative conceptual reviews); (d) impact and influence with respect to articles, authors, and institutions; (e) latent sematic analysis findings to illustrate the evolution and change of journal content over a 33-year comparison period (i.e., it has evolved substantially); and desirable directions for future evolution of the journal (i.e., strengthen our scientific foundation, increase multidisciplinary linkages, focus on multilevel system dynamics as core capabilities, and improve the translation of industrial and organizational science to evidence-based practice and vice versa). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).

[Rhinology Journal: where are we going?

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Lund, V. J.; Fokkens, W. J.

2010-01-01

In the past 5 years Rhinology has evolved to a high impact Journal in Otorhinolaryngology with a citation index of . 2.182. The result is an enormous increase in the number of papers send to the journal for review. In 2010 we expect to reach over 300 manuscripts that are send to the Journal. This

Which journals do primary care physicians and specialists access from an online service?

Science.gov (United States)

McKibbon, K Ann; Haynes, R Brian; McKinlay, R James; Lokker, Cynthia

2007-07-01

The study sought to determine which online journals primary care physicians and specialists not affiliated with an academic medical center access and how the accesses correlate with measures of journal quality and importance. Observational study of full-text accesses made during an eighteen-month digital library trial was performed. Access counts were correlated with six methods composed of nine measures for assessing journal importance: ISI impact factors; number of high-quality articles identified during hand-searches of key clinical journals; production data for ACP Journal Club, InfoPOEMs, and Evidence-Based Medicine; and mean clinician-provided clinical relevance and newsworthiness scores for individual journal titles. Full-text journals were accessed 2,322 times by 87 of 105 physicians. Participants accessed 136 of 348 available journal titles. Physicians often selected journals with relatively higher numbers of articles abstracted in ACP Journal Club. Accesses also showed significant correlations with 6 other measures of quality. Specialists' access patterns correlated with 3 measures, with weaker correlations than for primary care physicians. Primary care physicians, more so than specialists, chose full-text articles from clinical journals deemed important by several measures of value. Most journals accessed by both groups were of high quality as measured by this study's methods for assessing journal importance.

How Multidisciplinary Are the Multidisciplinary Journals Science and Nature?

Science.gov (United States)

Solomon, Gregg E. A.; Carley, Stephen; Porter, Alan L.

2016-01-01

Interest in cross-disciplinary research knowledge interchange runs high. Review processes at funding agencies, such as the U.S. National Science Foundation, consider plans to disseminate research across disciplinary bounds. Publication in the leading multidisciplinary journals, Nature and Science, may signify the epitome of successful interdisciplinary integration of research knowledge and cross-disciplinary dissemination of findings. But how interdisciplinary are they? The journals are multidisciplinary, but do the individual articles themselves draw upon multiple fields of knowledge and does their influence span disciplines? This research compares articles in three fields (Cell Biology, Physical Chemistry, and Cognitive Science) published in a leading disciplinary journal in each field to those published in Nature and Science. We find comparable degrees of interdisciplinary integration and only modest differences in cross-disciplinary diffusion. That said, though the rate of out-of-field diffusion might be comparable, the sheer reach of Nature and Science, indicated by their potent Journal Impact Factors, means that the diffusion of knowledge therein can far exceed that of leading disciplinary journals in some fields (such as Physical Chemistry and Cognitive Science in our samples). PMID:27043924

Frequently cited journals in forensic psychology.

Science.gov (United States)

Black, Steve

2012-02-01

Works cited in six forensic psychology journals published 2008-2010 were counted to identify the most frequently cited journals. The sample of works cited (N = 21,776) was not a definitive ranked list of important journals in forensic psychology, but was large enough to indicate high-impact journals. The list of frequently cited publications included more general psychiatry and psychology journals than titles specific to forensic psychology. The implications of the proportion of general versus specific titles for collections supporting research in forensic psychology were discussed.

Reporting of various methodological and statistical parameters in negative studies published in prominent Indian Medical Journals: a systematic review.

Science.gov (United States)

Charan, J; Saxena, D

2014-01-01

Biased negative studies not only reflect poor research effort but also have an impact on 'patient care' as they prevent further research with similar objectives, leading to potential research areas remaining unexplored. Hence, published 'negative studies' should be methodologically strong. All parameters that may help a reader to judge validity of results and conclusions should be reported in published negative studies. There is a paucity of data on reporting of statistical and methodological parameters in negative studies published in Indian Medical Journals. The present systematic review was designed with an aim to critically evaluate negative studies published in prominent Indian Medical Journals for reporting of statistical and methodological parameters. Systematic review. All negative studies published in 15 Science Citation Indexed (SCI) medical journals published from India were included in present study. Investigators involved in the study evaluated all negative studies for the reporting of various parameters. Primary endpoints were reporting of "power" and "confidence interval." Power was reported in 11.8% studies. Confidence interval was reported in 15.7% studies. Majority of parameters like sample size calculation (13.2%), type of sampling method (50.8%), name of statistical tests (49.1%), adjustment of multiple endpoints (1%), post hoc power calculation (2.1%) were reported poorly. Frequency of reporting was more in clinical trials as compared to other study designs and in journals having impact factor more than 1 as compared to journals having impact factor less than 1. Negative studies published in prominent Indian medical journals do not report statistical and methodological parameters adequately and this may create problems in the critical appraisal of findings reported in these journals by its readers.

AFRICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC REVIEW

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Dr Kazungu

African Journal of Economic Review, Volume VI, Issue I, January 2018. 33. Analyzing .... Previous analysis of inflation in Nigeria as a macroeconomic variable have focused at its impact ..... International Journal of Finance and Economics 2, 225-235. ... Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis in Social Sciences Volume 1,.

Publication productivity of Czech sociology in scientific journals within the last decade

Czech Academy of Sciences Publication Activity Database

Basl, Josef; Münich, Daniel; Sidorkin, O.

-, č. 392 (2009), s. 1-41 ISSN 1211-3298 R&D Projects: GA MŠk LC542 Institutional research plan: CEZ:AV0Z70850503; CEZ:AV0Z70280505 Keywords : Czech sociologist * research * journals with impact factor Subject RIV: AO - Sociology, Demography http://www.cerge-ei.cz/pdf/wp/Wp392.pdf

Journal of Religion and Human Relations

African Journals Online (AJOL)

The Journal of Religion and Human Relations (JORAHR) is an academic journal with focus ... The impact of philosophy in the interpretation of African values with particular ... Judeo - Igbo traditional religious conception of sin: socio – religious ...

A journal cancellation survey and resulting impact on interlibrary loan.

Science.gov (United States)

Nash, Jacob L; McElfresh, Karen R

2016-10-01

The research describes an extensible method of evaluating and cancelling electronic journals during a budget shortfall and evaluates implications for interlibrary loan (ILL) and user satisfaction. We calculated cost per use for cancellable electronic journal subscriptions (n=533) from the 2013 calendar year and the first half of 2014, cancelling titles with cost per use greater than $20 and less than 100 yearly uses. For remaining titles, we issued an online survey asking respondents to rank the importance of journals to their work. Finally, we gathered ILL requests and COUNTER JR2 turnaway reports for calendar year 2015. Three hundred fifty-four respondents completed the survey. Because of the level of heterogeneity of titles in the survey as well as respondents' backgrounds, most titles were reported to be never used. We developed criteria based on average response across journals to determine which to cancel. Based on this methodology, we cancelled eight journals. Examination of ILL data revealed that none of the cancelled titles were requested with any frequency. Free-text responses indicated, however, that many value free ILL as a suitable substitute for immediate full-text access to biomedical journal literature. Soliciting user feedback through an electronic survey can assist collections librarians to make electronic journal cancellation decisions during slim budgetary years. This methodology can be adapted and improved upon at other health sciences libraries.

Publishing bioethics and bioethics--reflections on academic publishing by a journal editor.

Science.gov (United States)

Schüklenk, Udo

2011-02-01

This article by one of the Editors of Bioethics, published in the 25th anniversary issue of the journal, describes some of the revolutionary changes academic publishing has undergone during the last decades. Many humanities journals went from typically small print-runs, counting by the hundreds, to on-line availability in thousands of university libraries worldwide. Article up-take by our subscribers can be measured efficiently. The implications of this and other changes to academic publishing are discussed. Important ethical challenges need to be addressed in areas such as the enforcement of plagiarism-related policies, the so-called 'impact factor' and its impact on academic integrity, and the question of whether on-line only publishing can currently guarantee the integrity of academic publishing histories. © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Payments by US pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to US medical journal editors: retrospective observational study

Science.gov (United States)

Bell, Chaim M; Matelski, John J; Detsky, Allan S; Cram, Peter

2017-01-01

Objective To estimate financial payments from industry to US journal editors. Design Retrospective observational study. Setting 52 influential (high impact factor for their specialty) US medical journals from 26 specialties and US Open Payments database, 2014. Participants 713 editors at the associate level and above identified from each journal’s online masthead. Main outcome measures All general payments (eg, personal income) and research related payments from pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to eligible physicians in 2014. Percentages of editors receiving payments and the magnitude of such payments were compared across journals and by specialty. Journal websites were also reviewed to determine if conflict of interest policies for editors were readily accessible. Results Of 713 eligible editors, 361 (50.6%) received some (>$0) general payments in 2014, and 139 (19.5%) received research payments. The median general payment was $11 (£8; €9) (interquartile range $0-2923) and the median research payment was $0 ($0-0). The mean general payment was $28 136 (SD $415 045), and the mean research payment was $37 963 (SD $175 239). The highest median general payments were received by journal editors from endocrinology ($7207, $0-85 816), cardiology ($2664, $0-12 912), gastroenterology ($696, $0-20 002), rheumatology ($515, $0-14 280), and urology ($480, $90-669). For high impact general medicine journals, median payments were $0 ($0-14). A review of the 52 journal websites revealed that editor conflict of interest policies were readily accessible (ie, within five minutes) for 17/52 (32.7%) of journals. Conclusions Industry payments to journal editors are common and often large, particularly for certain subspecialties. Journals should consider the potential impact of such payments on public trust in published research. PMID:29074628

Algorithmic Procedure for Finding Semantically Related Journals.

Science.gov (United States)

Pudovkin, Alexander I.; Garfield, Eugene

2002-01-01

Using citations, papers and references as parameters a relatedness factor (RF) is computed for a series of journals. Sorting these journals by the RF produces a list of journals most closely related to a specified starting journal. The method appears to select a set of journals that are semantically most similar to the target journal. The…

[Predatory journals: how their publishers operate and how to avoid them].

Science.gov (United States)

Kratochvíl, Jiří; Plch, Lukáš