RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: This observational study assessed the differences in the gender of the first and last authors in the most-cited dental articles over the last 4 decades. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Articles were obtained through an electronic search of the most-cited articles in dentistry by decade (total n = 400 articles). The 100 most-cited studies in each decade (1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019), with any study design, with results in dentistry were eligible. The gender of the first and last authors was determined using the Genderize database. Comparative evaluation of gender distribution in general and across the 4 decades was performed with the Chi-square test, and the contribution of variables on the citation rate of articles was performed using linear regression. RESULTS: There were statistical differences between the gender distributions, with a predominance of men in the first (83.8%) and the last (86.8%) positions (P < .001). Over the decades, there was a tendency for an increase in the proportion of women as the last author (P = .002; Chi-square trend Test), with an increase of women from 6% to 22% across the last 4 decades. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the genders for the first author in the last 4 decades (P = .163; Chi-square trend Test). CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that men lead a large percentage of the most-cited articles in dentistry and that this trend has not shown substantial modifications over the last years. Nonetheless, for the position of last authorship, an increase in women's representativity was observed over the last decades.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional study aims to determine whether the gender of the authors plays a role in the position of authorship within the 100 most cited articles in dentistry. METHODS: An electronic search was performed in October 2022 in the SCOPUS database, considering filters by 'subject area' [dentistry], 'document type' [article], and 'source type' [journal]. The search was performed without restriction on the study design, publication yearor language. Information regarding each article was then extracted. The gender of the first and last author was determined by associating their first names with the probability of the name being male or female, using the Genderize database. Comparative evaluation of gender distribution was performed with the Chi-Square test. RESULTS: Articles ranged from 5214 to 579 citations. Included studies were published between 1964 and 2019, with the majority being from journals with the highest impact factors in the field. There were statistical significance differences between the gender distribution of the first and last authors, with a predominance of man in both authorships positions (all p<0.00). Only 15% and 12.6% the most cited papers in dental research presented a woman as first and last authors, respectively. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, female authors are not as regarded as male authors in prestigious authorship positions in the most cited dental publications, and gender bias can still be considered prominent in the dental research community. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings of the present study indicate that the gender imbalance in citation practices, reported in several areas, also occurs in the field of Dentistry. It is essential that more discussions be raised about gender disparities and about the female presence in the scientific community.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Objective: This bibliographic analysis was designed to review all dental publications in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and evaluate the effect of international collaboration on the impact of published articles. Methods: The Web of Science (WOS) database was used to extract all related published articles in the KSA from 1982 to 2021. The keywords were connected using Boolean Operators to download related articles. Downloaded articles were screened according to the following inclusion criteria: collaboration journal category, journal discipline, number of citations, number of authors, and impact factor. After applying the inclusion criteria and excluding single-author articles, 5,689 documents were included in the final analysis. The chi-square test and two-independent samples t-test were used to determine the statistical significance between the variables. Results: A significantly higher proportion of articles with international collaboration (51.4%) were published in dental journals than those published nationally (43.3%) or within the institutional level (41.8%) (P < 0.0001). In addition, the average number of citations (9.28 ± 23.8) ranged from 0 to 749, received by an article and the impact factor of the journal in which the article was published, significantly higher in the case of internationally collaborative work compared with national or within institutional collaboration (P < 0.0001). Conclusion: International collaboration positively affected the impact factor, number of citations, and quartile rank of published articles. Moreover, the number of co-authors in different countries contributes to the international collaboration effect.

RESUMEN

The present study provides a summarised view of entrepreneurial intention (EI) research to date. Before the application of scientometric techniques over the 1920 papers retrieved from Scopus, this paper collects the main systematic reviews and pioneering bibliometric analyses, and summarises their major findings. The use of direct citation, differentiating between Local and Global Citation, has not been used in the area of EI research. However, it provides the current status quo of this field of research, as well as interesting results on the progress of the study of this research topic, revealing previously overlooked findings. The application of scientometric tools allows us to identify the four thematic poles that concentrate the greatest effort of researchers in this area: modelling EI and discussing its antecedents and relationships; self-efficacy as an antecedent of EI; social entrepreneurial intention; and the effect of education on EI -distinguishing the effect of educational context from the effect of personal factors on EI-. It also uncovers the inspirational role of this area of research on others, while revealing the most highly specialised journals in EI, the papers that play a foundational role in the field, and the authors with the most extensive careers in this topic. This research also assesses progress on the most important challenges facing the field and raises some unanswered questions.

RESUMEN

The purpose of this study was to use the Altmetric Attention Score to determine the 50 most impactful medial ulnar collateral ligament articles in online media and compare their characteristics to the most-cited medial ulnar collateral ligament articles in the scientific literature. The Altmetric database was queried to identify all published articles about the medial ulnar collateral ligament, and this list was stratified by the Altmetric Attention Score to identify the 50 highest scoring articles. Several data elements were extracted, including article topic, article type, journal name, and the number of online mentions on Facebook, Twitter, news, and other platforms. Each article's geographic origin was determined based on the institutional affiliation of the first author. Our index search yielded 1283 articles published between 1987 and 2020, from which the 50 articles with the highest Altmetric Attention Scores were included for analysis. Altmetric Attention Scores of the top 50 medial ulnar collateral ligament articles ranged from 20 to 482 (median: 32, interquartile range: 20-62). The most common article type was original research (72%), and the most common topic was epidemiology/risk factors (26%). A majority of studies were Level 3 (36%) or Level 4 evidence (36%). Of the top 50 medial ulnar collateral ligament articles, 94% originated from the United States. A few articles had a high Altmetric Attention Score, suggesting that medial ulnar collateral ligament research does not generate consistently high online attention. The lack of Level 1 studies suggests the need for high-level studies on the medial ulnar collateral ligament. Most studies originated in the United States and were published in the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine-affiliated journals. The medial ulnar collateral ligament articles included in this study differed substantially from a previous report of the most-cited medial ulnar collateral ligament articles in the literature, suggesting that alternative metrics add a unique dimension to understanding the overall impact of published research on the medial ulnar collateral ligament.

RESUMEN

Objectives: To identify the top 100 most impactful anterior cruciate ligament articles in online media as measured by the Altmetric Attention Score and compare their characteristics to the most-cited anterior cruciate ligament articles in the scientific literature. Methods: The Altmetric database was queried to identify all published articles pertaining to the anterior cruciate ligament. The search yielded 9445 articles, which were stratified by highest to lowest Altmetric Attention Score. The top 100 articles were included. Collected data included article type, article topic, journal name, and online mentions in news, blogs, Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia, and other sources. The geographic origin of each article was also determined based on the institutional affiliation of the first author. Results: Altmetric Attention Score of the top 100 anterior cruciate ligament articles ranged from 109 to 2193 (median 172.0, interquartile range 137.5-271.5). Of the 100 articles, 65 were published in three journals: American Journal of Sports Medicine, British Journal of Sports Medicine, and Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. The most prevalent article type was original research (60%), followed by systematic review/meta-analysis (18%). The most prevalent article topic was rehabilitation and return to play after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (22%), followed by epidemiology/risk factors (16%), injury prevention (14%), and biomechanics of anterior cruciate ligament injuries (14%). Of the top 100 articles, 54% were American, 31% were European, and 15% were published in other countries outside of the United States and Europe. Conclusion: This study used Altmetric Attention Score to identify the 100 most engaged anterior cruciate ligament articles in online media. The characteristics of these articles differed substantially from the most-cited anterior cruciate ligament articles in the literature with regard to article type, article topic, geographic origin, and publication journal. These findings suggest that alternative metrics measure distinct components of anterior cruciate ligament article engagement and add an important dimension to understanding the overall impact of published research on the anterior cruciate ligament.

RESUMEN

Recent literature has demonstrated the associations between social media attention, as measured by altmetric attention score (AAS), and higher citation rates across medical disciplines. Despite increasing use of AAS, an understanding of factors associated with higher AAS and social media attention remains lacking. Furthermore, if this increased attention correlates with a higher methodological quality and lower biases has not been determined. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to determine the relationship between methodological quality, study biases and the AAS in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). All RCTs from 2016 in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of the American Medical Society (JAMA), and Lancet were extracted and the (1) AAS; (2) Methodological Bias (JADAD Scale); Study Bias (Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for RCTs) recorded. A total of 296 RCTs with a median (range) AAS and citation rate per article of 234.0(7-4079) and 165.0(4-3257), respectively, were included. The AAS was positively associated with citation rate (ß 0.19, 95% CI 0.10-0.29; P < 0.001). Methodological bias was not associated with the AAS (ß - 36.3, 95% CI - 83.5-10.9; P = 0.131), but was negatively associated with higher citation rates (ß - 66.4, 95% CI - 106.0 to - 26.9; P = 0.001). The number of study biases was not associated with the AAS (ß 43.7, 95% CI - 6.3-93.7;P = 0.086), but was positively associated with a higher citation rate (ß 64.5, 95% CI 22.4-106.6; P = 0.003). The online attention of RCTs in medical journals was not necessarily reflective of high methodological quality and minimal study biases, but was associated with higher citation rates. Researchers and clinicians should critically examine each article despite the amount of online attention an article receives as the AAS does not necessarily reflect article quality.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Clinical trials are at the top of research study designs and tend to attract high citation numbers. Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a multidisciplinary disease that continues to be the subject of peak research interest. In general, the literature relating to the predictors of citation rates in clinical trials remains limited. This review aims to identify the factors that influence citation numbers in high-impact GBM clinical trials. The 100 most cited GBM trials of any phase published from 1975 to 2019 were selected and reviewed. The primary analysis correlated citation numbers of articles with various trial and publication-related predictors using the Pearson correlation coefficient. The secondary analysis compared the mean citation numbers for different subgroups using the mean difference test. The median (range) citation number for the selected 100 trials was 349 (135-16,384). The primary analysis showed a significant correlation between citation numbers of articles and the study population (P = 0.024), trial phase (I-III) (P = 0.0427), and the impact factor (IF) of the journal (P < 0.0001). The secondary analysis demonstrated significantly higher mean citation numbers in all trials with the following features: study population ≥115 (P = 0.0208), phase III (P = 0.0372), treatment protocol including radiotherapy (P = 0.0189), temozolomide (TMZ) therapy (P = 0.0343), IF of the journal ≥14.9 (P = 0.02), and general medical journals (P = 0.28). We conclude that the most significant predictors of citation rates in high-impact GBM trials were the study population, trial phase, and journal's IF. The treatment protocol was a positive predictor when it included the currently widely accepted treatment modalities (radiotherapy and TZM). Randomization, age of publication, as well as the numbers of arms, authors, centers, countries, and references were not significant predictors. Increasing awareness of the factors that could affect citations may help researchers undertaking clinical trials to enhance the academic impact of their work.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Citation rates are an important measure for the impact of articles. This study is the most comprehensive analysis of predictors for scientific neurosurgical research articles. METHODS: Scientific articles published in 13 neurosurgical journals in 2015 were selected. Data collected included article subject, level of evidence (LOE), journal impact factor (IF), authorship, contributing centers, and study design. Citation counts were collected for each article in Web of Science (WoS) and Google Scholar (GS) 2.5 and 5 years after publication and Scopus 5 years after publication. A generalized linear mixed-effects model using the predictors of search engine, LOE, number of centers, number of authors, and IF was constructed to predict total citation count at 5 years. RESULTS: A total of 2867 articles generated 39,190 citations in WoS, 61,682 in GS, and 43,481 in Scopus. The median number of citations per article was 10 (interquartile range [IQR], 14) in WoS, 15 (IQR, 20) in GS, and 11 (IQR, 15) in Scopus. On average, for every 1 citation in WoS, Scopus and GS identified 1.11 and 1.58 citations, respectively. Significant predictors of citation count in all databases 5 years after publication included search engine, LOE, number of centers, number of authors, number of countries, journal IF, and the month of publication (P < 0.05). The article subject (e.g., tumor or spine) did not significantly predict citation counts. CONCLUSIONS: In the most thorough analysis of citation predictors in the neurosurgical literature, search engine, LOE, number of centers, number of authors, number of countries, journal impact factor, and month of publication influenced citations 5 years after publication.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Understanding the impact different journal articles have in any academic field is important - particularly in emerging professions. A bibliometric analysis like this does not yet exist for paramedicine, despite the rapid increase in its primary literature. The objective of the present study was to identify and analyse the 100 top-cited articles about paramedicine. METHODS: We searched the Scopus database in August 2020 for studies relating to paramedicine. After screening titles and abstracts, we extracted the citation count, journal name, publication year, and country of origin. We manually assessed whether the study was clinical or not, noted the sex of the authors, the profession of first and last authors and the study design used. RESULTS: The median citation count for the top 100 papers in paramedicine was 58 (interquartile range 46-84 citations). The articles were published across 48 different journals, with Resuscitation and Prehospital Emergency Care being the two most frequent. The top-cited paramedic papers originated from 16 different countries and were written predominantly by medical doctors. Three quarters (73%) of the studies had a clinical focus, and a quarter (26%) were randomised controlled trials. CONCLUSIONS: The evolution of paramedicine towards professionalism is backed up by the growth of its own body of knowledge. This analysis of the 100 most cited studies in paramedicine is the first of its kind and highlights that paramedicine articles have a high citation count and are published across numerous journals, but with a relative lack of contribution from paramedic practitioners and female researchers.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: We classified the articles published in the journal Hip & Pelvis and analyzed the relationship between study characteristics and citation rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All articles published in Hip & Pelvis from 2009 to 2019 were included. We classified the articles according to the type, language, listing in PubMed Central (PMC), treatment modality, material, design, anatomical focus, number of authors, and number of cases. We analyzed the citation rate according to this classification, with yearly citation rate reflecting the exposure period until March 2020. RESULTS: The yearly citation rate increased significantly after the language of the journal was changed from Korean to English in June 2014 (mean=0.96 vs. 1.63, P<0.05), and again after the journal was listed in PMC in March 2016 (mean=1.05 vs. 1.92, P<0.05). The yearly citation rates of review articles was highest, followed by those of editorials, original articles, and case reports (in this order). Among original articles, trauma-related articles had higher yearly citation rates than non-trauma-related articles (mean=1.00 vs. 0.68, P=0.034). Among clinical articles, studies focusing on the pelvis had higher yearly citation rates than studies on the hip or femur (mean=1.85 vs. 0.71 vs. 0.91, P=0.003). CONCLUSION: The yearly citation rate of articles increased significantly after the language of Hip & Pelvis was changed to English and after the journal was listed in PMC. The mean yearly citation rate of articles focusing on the pelvis was significantly higher than that of articles focusing on the hip or femur.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To examine the factors that influence country self-citation rate (SCR) in clinical neurology and to assess the impact of self-citation on the ranking of the top 50 countries. METHODS: SCImago Journal & Country Rank was used to collect data for the 50 most cited countries in clinical neurology during 1996-2019. Country SCR was correlated with several productivity parameters and examined statistically. Countries that dropped in their ranking after the exclusion of self-citations were identified. RESULTS: The median (range) country SCR for the 50 most cited countries was 11.3%.(5.3%- 47%). Country SCR correlated significantly with total citable documents and total cites numbers and rankings. The exclusion of self-citations led to a drop in the ranking of 8(16%) countries only. No significant difference between the total and net total cites rankings was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Self-citation can be appropriate and reflect an expansion on earlier research. Highly cited productive countries tend to have high country SCR. Excluding self-citations had minimal impact on the ranking of the top 50 countries. Our findings indicate that self-citation is unlikely to influence country standing amongst the top 50 and does not support the argument for eliminating self-citations from citation-based metrics. A more globalization through international collaboration in research is encouraged.

RESUMEN

Objectives The purpose of the study was to evaluate the impact of country self-citation rate (SCR) among medical specialties in Saudi Arabia, and to assess the impact of self-citations on the country's total cites world ranking in different specialties. Methods SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) was used to collect data related to all medical specialties in Saudi Arabia for the period 1996-2019. The country SCR for the specialties was correlated with several bibliometric parameters and examined statistically. The specialties that showed a drop in Saudi Arabia's total cites world ranking following the exclusion of self-citations were identified. Results The median country SCR for 46 specialties in Saudi Arabia was 9.5% (range: 4.6-23.1%). The two specialties with the highest country SCR were Public Health (23.1%) and Family Practice (22.9%). Country SCR was significantly higher in the non-clinical specialties compared to clinical specialties (15.3% vs. 9.6%). It did not correlate significantly with any of the examined productivity indices. The exclusion of self-citations resulted in a drop in Saudi Arabia's total cites world ranking in six (13%) specialties only. There was no significant difference between the country's total cites and net total cites world rankings in the specialties. Conclusions Self-citation may be appropriate and signify an expansion of the authors' previous work. Country SCR in medical specialties in Saudi Arabia is relatively low and not affected by total documents and total cites. Non-clinical specialties tend to self-cite more. The exclusion of self-citations had minimal effect on Saudi Arabia's total cites world ranking, indicating that country SCR in the specialties is unlikely to impact its international scientific standing. Our findings do not support the argument for eliminating self-citation from citation-based metrics. We believe that more collaborative and global research practices should be encouraged.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Citation rate and journal impact factor have traditionally been used to assess research impact; however, these may fail to represent impact beyond the sphere of academics. Given that social media is now used to disseminate research, alternative web-based metrics (altmetrics) were recently developed to better understand research impact on social media. However, the relationship between altmetrics and traditional bibliometrics in orthopaedic literature is poorly understood. PURPOSE: To (1) assess the extent that altmetrics correlate with traditional bibliometrics and (2) identify publication characteristics that predict greater altmetrics scores. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Articles published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM), The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Acta Orthopaedica, and Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy between January 2016 and December 2016 were analyzed. Among the extracted publication characteristics were journal, number of authors, geographic region of origin, highest degree of first author, study subject and design, sample size, conflicts of interest, and level of evidence; number of references, institutions, citations, tweets, Facebook mentions, and news mentions; and Altmetric Attention Score (AAS). Multivariate regressions were used to determine (1) publication characteristics predictive of AAS and social media attention (mentions on Twitter, Facebook, and the news) and (2) the relationship between AAS and citation rate. RESULTS: A total of 496 published articles were included, with a mean AAS of 8.6 (SD, 31.7; range, 0-501) and a mean citation rate of 15.0 (SD, 16.1; range, 0-178). Articles in AJSM (ß = 19.9; P < .001), publications from North America (ß = 8.5; P = .033), and studies concerning measure validation/reliability (ß = 25.5; P = .004) were independently associated with higher AAS. Greater AAS score significantly predicted a greater citation rate (ß = 0.16; P < .0001). The citation rate was an independent predictor of greater social media attention on Twitter, Facebook, and the news (odds ratio range, 1.02-1.03; P < .05 all). CONCLUSION: AAS had a significant positive association with citation rates of articles in 5 high-impact orthopaedic journals. Articles in AJSM, studies concerning measure validation and reliability, and publications from North America were positively associated with greater AAS. A greater number of citations was consistently associated with publication attention received on social media platforms.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is portrayed as lasting deficiency to achieve or sustain penile erection in successful vaginal penetration and is a major problem affecting the quality of life in men. The number of ED sufferers worldwide is anticipated to reach 322 million, by 2025. In recent years, many publications and studies have been made in the field of ED. Our aim was to perform a detailed bibliometric analysis of erectile dysfunction literature. In this study, we downloaded the data of the publications from the Web of Science Core Collection. All items indexed in these databases between 1975 and 2018 were included. Documents produced in 2019 were excluded. We searched in WoS databases for the keywords of 'erectile dysfunction' and 'impotence'. Our basic search into WoS databases retrieved a total of 28,266 documents indexed between 1975 and 2018. English dominated impotence literature (92.541%) followed by German, French and Korean (2.136%, 1.920% and 1.180% respectively). The United States has made tremendous improvement in ED studies and is still the effective country. The most prolific author was Montorsi F with 330 articles from Italy, and three-fifth of the authors were from the USA.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The number of citations an article receives is an important measure of impact for published research. There are limited published data on predictors of citations in neurosurgery research. We aimed to analyze predictors of citations for neurosurgical articles. METHODS: All articles published in 14 neurosurgical journals in the year 2015 were examined and data collected about their features. The number of citations for each article was tallied using both Web of Science (WoS) and Google Scholar (GS) 2.5 years after their publication in print. Negative binomial regression was then performed to determine the relationship between article features and citation counts for scientific articles. RESULTS: A total of 3923 articles were analyzed, comprising 2867 scientific articles (72.6%) and 1056 nonscientific (editorial, commentary, etc.) articles (27.4%). At 2.5 years, scientific articles had a median [interquartile range] number of citations per article of 3.0 [6.0] and 7.0 [9.0] found in WoS and GS, respectively; nonscientific articles had accumulated median 0.0 [2.0] in both WOS and GS. Articles with the study topic "Spine" had the highest citation count at 4.0 [5.0] and 8.0 [10.0] in WoS and GS, respectively. Significant predictors of citation count in scientific articles were level of evidence, number of centers, number of authors, and impact factor. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest investigation analyzing predictors of citations in the neurosurgical literature. Factors found to be most influential on citation rates in scientific articles included the study's level of evidence, number of participating centers, number of authors, and the publishing journal's impact factor.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIM: This study aimed to investigate the association between Twitter exposure and the number of citations for coloproctology articles. METHOD: Original articles from journals using Twitter between June 2015 and May 2016 were evaluated for the following characteristics: publishing journal; article subject; study design; nationality, speciality and affiliation of the author(s); and reference on Twitter. Citation data for these articles were retrieved from Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com) in January 2018. We performed a univariate analysis using these data followed by a multivariate, logistic regression analysis to search for factors associated with a high citation level, which was defined as accrual of more than five citations. RESULTS: Out of six coloproctology journals listed on the InCites JCR database, three (Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, Colorectal Disease and Techniques in Coloproctology) used Twitter, where 200 (49.5%) out of a total of 404 articles had been featured. Citation rates of articles that featured on Twitter were significantly higher than those that did not (11.4 ± 9.2 vs 4.1 ± 3.1, P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, Twitter exposure (OR 8.6, P = 0.001), European Union nationality (OR 2.4, P = 0.004), Colorectal Disease journal (OR 3.3, P = 0.005) and systematic review articles (OR 3.4, P = 0.009) were associated with higher citation levels. CONCLUSION: Article exposure on Twitter was strongly associated with a high citation level. Medical communities should encourage journals as well as physicians to actively utilize social media to expedite the spread of new ideas and ultimately benefit medical society as a whole.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The citation rate of a research published article is an indicator of its quality and impact and contributes to the journal's impact factor. Within the orthopaedic sports medicine literature, predictors of citation rates have not been previously described. PURPOSE: To identify characteristics of published articles that predict 5-year citation rates of studies in the orthopaedic sports medicine literature. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Research articles published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM), Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery, and Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy (KSSTA) from 2012 were analyzed. Extracted characteristics of published articles included journal, author number, origin of study, first author degree, subject of study, study type, sample size, number of references and institutions, conflicts of interest, level of evidence, and 5-year citation rates. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine predictors of greater than the mean number of citations at 5 years. RESULTS: A total of 825 published articles ( AJSM, n = 313; Arthroscopy, n = 173; KSSTA, n = 339) were included in the final analysis. The mean number of 5-year citations was 23.2 (95% CI, 21.6-24.9; range, 1.0-260.0). AJSM had a significantly greater citation rate (32.4) than Arthroscopy (21.7) and KSSTA (15.2) ( P < .001 for both). Arthroscopy had a greater citation rate than KSSTA ( P = .008). Independent predictors of greater than the mean number of citations at 5 years were published articles in AJSM (odds ratio [OR], 5.17; 95% CI, 2.81-9.52; P < .0001), published articles of North American origin (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.25-2.58; P = .002), and published articles regarding the hip (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.08-6.67; P = .035). CONCLUSION: Published articles in AJSM, those from North America, and those examining the hip were independent predictors of greater citation rates at 5 years.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The journal impact factor (JIF) is often used to assess the prestige of scientific journals. Citations from original articles and reviews as well as citations from noncitable items contribute to the numerator in these calculations. However, since noncitable articles are not included in the denominator, the JIF may be skewed by the types of articles and not accurately reflect the prestige of the journal. The purpose of our study was to develop an alternative and complementary metric by which journals may be assessed. This "adjusted citation rate metric" is based on citations that originate only from citable items in the journal. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We tabulated the number of citations and citable items for original articles from the Web of Science Core Collection for 5 consecutive years (2010-2014) for 20 general radiology journals. The adjusted citation rates (CR) per original article and reviews were calculated using only citations that originated from citable items. RESULTS: The adjusted CR in 2015 was similar to the JIF in 14 of the 20 journals, higher in four journals, and lower in two journals. Using this system, Radiology, Investigative Radiology, and European Radiology remained first, second, and third respectively among journals published in the field of general radiology. To allow for equal distribution of original articles vs reviews among general radiology journals, we calculated the adjusted CR where the standard distribution of original articles is 50%. CONCLUSION: Adjusted citation rate is an objective index for assessing journal impact that can serve as an alternative and complementary metric with which to measure the journal impact.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

In this study we investigated the characteristics of psychiatry manuscript that influence its citation rate. We conducted a cross-sectional study of published articles (n = 545), from January to June 2007, from 6 major psychiatry journals with the highest 5-year impact-factor. Citation count for these articles was retrieved from Web Of Science (by Clarivate Analytics) and 22 article characteristics were tabulated manually. We then predicted the citation rate by performing univariate analysis, spearman rank-order correlation, and multiple regression model on the collected variables. Using spearman rank-order correlation, we found the following variables to have significant positive correlation with citations: abstract character count (rs and p-value, 0.22 and 0.001 respectively), number of references (0.2, 0.01), abstract word count (0.17, 0.0005), number of pages (0.15, 0.003), open access (0.06, 0.05), study design reported in title (0.04, 0.0001), total number of words (0.03, 0.01) and structured abstract (0.03, 0.0009). In a multivariate linear regression model, the following variables predicted increased citation rates (p < 0.001, R2 = 0.38): reporting of study design in title, structured abstract and open access. Editors and authors of psychiatry journals can improve the impact of their journals and articles by utilizing this bibliometric study when assembling their manuscript.

Asunto(s)