共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of Pakistani Medical Journals using the principles of citation analysis. METHODS: References of articles published in 2006 in three selected Pakistani medical journals were collected and examined. The number of citations for each Pakistani medical journal was totalled. The first ranking of journals was based on the total number of citations; second ranking was based on impact factor 2006 and third ranking was based on the 5-year impact factor. Self-citations were excluded in all the three ratings. RESULTS: A total of 9079 citations in 567 articles were examined. Forty-nine separate Pakistani medical journals were cited. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association remains on the top in all three rankings, while Journal of College of Physicians and Surgeons-Pakistan attains second position in the ranking based on the total number of citations. The Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences moves to second position in the ranking based on the impact factor 2006. The Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad moves to second position in the ranking based on the 5-year impact factor. CONCLUSION: This study examined the citation pattern of Pakistani medical journals. The impact factor, despite its limitations, is a valid indicator of quality for journals. 相似文献
2.
3.
4.
《Journal of Informetrics》2022,16(2):101293
We study the effects of an article featured on the cover of the journal Nature on citations to all articles published by its authors. Based on 30 years of bibliometric data, we find that cover articles are cited significantly more than non-cover articles, with this difference being long-lasting. However, when considering all articles (past and future) by Nature authors, we find that the publication of a cover article causes citations to previous articles by its authors to decline relative to citations to articles by non-cover authors. 相似文献
5.
我国大陆港台医学期刊外文参考文献差错情况对照分析 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
分别从大陆、香港及台湾选取医学期刊,随机抽取2004年卷的80条文献,按照文献的6个项目进行核查.结果显示:存在差错的文献数量分别为大陆期刊48条(60.0%),台湾期刊40条(50.0%),香港期刊37条(46.3%);三者的差错率差异无统计学意义,同时3组统计文献差错类型的构成差别也没有统计学意义;差错情况中以作者姓名和题名最为突出.认为在知识信息时代,提高科技论文的文献著录质量和规范化水平,是作者、审稿人及期刊编辑均应重视的问题. 相似文献
6.
Philip M. DAVIS 《Learned Publishing》2011,24(4):287-298
Prior research has suggested that providing free and discounted access to the scientific literature to researchers in low‐income countries increases article production and citation. Using traditional bibliometric indicators for institutions in sub‐Saharan Africa, we analyze whether institutional access to TEEAL (a digital collection of journal articles in agriculture and allied subjects) increases: (i) article production; (ii) reference length; and (iii) number of citations to journals included in the TEEAL collection. Our analysis is based on nearly 20,000 articles – containing half a million references – published between 1988 and 2009 at 70 institutions in 11 African countries. We report that access to TEEAL does not appear to result in higher article production, although it does lead to longer reference lists (an additional 2.6 references per paper) and a greater frequency of citations to TEEAL journals (an additional 0.4 references per paper), compared to non‐subscribing institutions. We discuss how traditional bibliometric indicators may not provide a full picture of the effectiveness of free and discounted literature programs. 相似文献
7.
《Library & information science research》2006,28(2):281-296
This article analyzes the bibliometric features (the number of pages, completion years, the fields of subject, the number of citations, and their distribution by types of sources and years) of 100 theses and dissertations completed at the Department of Librarianship of Hacettepe University between 1974 and 2002. Almost a quarter (24%) of all dissertations were on university libraries, followed by public libraries (9%). Doctoral dissertations were, on average, twice as long as master's theses and contained 2.5 times more citations. Monographs received more citations (50%) than journal articles did (42%). Recently completed theses and dissertations contained more citations to electronic publications. Fourteen (or 3.2% of all) journal titles (including Türk Kütüphaneciliği, College & Research Libraries, and Journal of the American Society for Information Science) received almost half (48.9%) of all citations. Eighty percent of journal titles were cited infrequently. No correlation was found between the frequency of citations of the most frequently cited journals and their impact factors. Cited journal titles in master's and doctoral theses and dissertations overlapped significantly. Similarly, journal titles cited in dissertations also overlapped significantly with those that were cited in the journal articles published in the professional literature. The distribution of citations to foreign journal titles fit Bradford's Law of Scattering. The mean half-life of all cited sources was 9 years. Sources cited in master's dissertations were relatively more current. Single authorship was the norm in cited resources. Coupled with in-library use data, findings of the present study can be used to identify the core journal titles in librarianship as well as to evaluate the existing library collections to decide which journal titles to keep, discard, or relegate to off-site storage areas. 相似文献
8.
Do academic journals favor authors who share their institutional affiliation? To answer this question we examine citation counts, as a proxy for paper quality, for articles published in four leading international relations journals during the years 2000–2015. We compare citation counts for articles written by “in-group members” (authors affiliated with the journal’s publishing institution) versus “out-group members” (authors not affiliated with that institution). Articles written by in-group authors received 18% to 49% fewer Web of Science citations when published in their home journal (International Security or World Politics) vs. an unaffiliated journal, compared to out-group authors. These results are mainly driven by authors who received their PhDs from Harvard or MIT. The findings show evidence of a bias within some journals towards publishing papers by faculty from their home institution, at the expense of paper quality. 相似文献
9.
This study shows how a journal's influence can be calculated by using citations obtained from Google Scholar and other methods even though the journal is not covered by any citation databases. Influence is measured in terms of foreign contributions, ‘equivalent’ immediacy scores of recent articles, and the calculation of citations and ‘equivalent’ impact factor. A total of 580 articles published in the Medical Journal of Malaysia (MJM) between 2004 and 2008 served as the sample. Very few foreign authors contributed to MJM (12.5%), implying its low regional acceptance as a channel for research communication. Immediacy scores for each year indicate citations were received by recently published articles. A total of 1,164 citations were received by 446 of the 580 articles and the main citing sources were journals (1,083) with reasonable h index and impact factor. Yearly impact scores ranged between 0.367 and 0.616. Higher impact factor scores were obtained by older articles. 相似文献
10.
11.
Dean Hendrix 《Journal of the Medical Library Association》2008,96(4):324-334
Objective:
The objective of this study was to analyze bibliometric data from ISI, National Institutes of Health (NIH)–funding data, and faculty size information for Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) member schools during 1997 to 2007 to assess research productivity and impact.Methods:
This study gathered and synthesized 10 metrics for almost all AAMC medical schools (n = 123): (1) total number of published articles per medical school, (2) total number of citations to published articles per medical school, (3) average number of citations per article, (4) institutional impact indices, (5) institutional percentages of articles with zero citations, (6) annual average number of faculty per medical school, (7) total amount of NIH funding per medical school, (8) average amount of NIH grant money awarded per faculty member, (9) average number of articles per faculty member, and (10) average number of citations per faculty member. Using principal components analysis, the author calculated the relationships between measures, if they existed.Results:
Principal components analysis revealed 3 major clusters of variables that accounted for 91% of the total variance: (1) institutional research productivity, (2) research influence or impact, and (3) individual faculty research productivity. Depending on the variables in each cluster, medical school research may be appropriately evaluated in a more nuanced way. Significant correlations exist between extracted factors, indicating an interrelatedness of all variables. Total NIH funding may relate more strongly to the quality of the research than the quantity of the research. The elimination of medical schools with outliers in 1 or more indicators (n = 20) altered the analysis considerably.Conclusions:
Though popular, ordinal rankings cannot adequately describe the multidimensional nature of a medical school''s research productivity and impact. This study provides statistics that can be used in conjunction with other sound methodologies to provide a more authentic view of a medical school''s research. The large variance of the collected data suggests that refining bibliometric data by discipline, peer groups, or journal information may provide a more precise assessment.Highlights
- Principal components analysis discovered three clusters of variables: (1) institutional research productivity, (2) research influence or impact, and (3) individual faculty research productivity.
- The associations between size-independent measures (e.g., average number of citations/article) were more significant than associations between size-independent bibliometric measures and size-dependent (e.g., number of faculty) bibliometric measures and vice versa, except in the case of total National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding.
- The factor coefficients, or loadings, for total NIH funding may associate more with the quality of research rather than the quantity of research.
- The removal of twenty outliers, fourteen highly productive or influential medical schools and six medical schools with relatively low research profiles, changed the results of the analysis significantly.
- This study''s broad institutional bibliometric data sets cannot be extrapolated to specific departments at the studied medical schools.
Implications
- Librarians, administrators, and faculty should use several methodologies in tandem with bibliometric data when evaluating institutions'' research impact and productivity.
- Health sciences librarians should not make use of university rankings materials lacking strong methodological foundations.
- This study''s bibliometric data may provide a starting point or point of comparison for future assessments.
12.
13.
Penetration of Nigerian predatory biomedical open access journals 2007–2012: a bibliometric study 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 This paper presents the bibliometric characteristics of 32 biomedical open access journals published by Academic Journals and International Research Journals – the two Nigerian publishers in Jeffery Beall's list of 23 predatory open access publishers in 2012. Data about the journals and the authors of their articles were collected from the websites of the publishers, Google Scholar and Web of Science. As at December 2012, the journals had together produced a total of 5,601 papers written by 5,599 authors, and received 12,596 citations. Authors from Asia accounted for 56.79% of the publications; those from Africa wrote 28.35% while Europe contributed 7.78%. Authors from Africa accounted for 18.25% of the citations these journals received, and this is about one‐third the number of citations by authors in Asia (54.62%). At country level, India ranks first in the top 10 citer countries, while Nigeria, the host country of the journals, ranked eighth. More in‐depth studies are required to develop further information about the journals such as how much scientific information the journals contain, as well as the science literacy of the authors and the editorial. 相似文献
14.
15.
《Library & information science research》1999,21(2):227-245
A citation analysis of 61 library science and information science dissertations revealed some interesting publication patterns. About 80% of the citations are to single authors, and as in analyses of periodical literature, males are cited more than females overall (about 61% to 39%). In dissertations related to school or public libraries, the male/female distribution is less disparate; for studies in academic or special libraries two thirds of the authors are male, and male authorship is 75% when only information science dissertations are analyzed. Journal articles are cited more than books, book chapters, proceedings, theses, and other formats with College & Research Libraries and Journal of the American Society for Information Science used most. Library and information science is impacted by several other disciplines, primarily education, computer science, health/medicine, psychology, communications, and business. Authors cited in dissertations represent a somewhat less parochial list in terms of citing U.S. publications than authors cited in studies analyzing journal citations; over half of all works cited were published within the last 10 years. 相似文献
16.
在学术期刊的计量评价指标体系中,影响因子和总被引频次是2项最为重要的指标,占据了较高的权重;但是,期刊办刊历史长短、发表论文多少、出版周期长短、学科人群多少等都会影响总被引频次的大小.尤其是一些发表大量低水平论文的期刊,依靠论文数量众多,依然可以获得较高的总被引频次;但其影响因子却很低,论文质量很差.如何客观甄别这类论文数量巨大而质量效益不高的期刊？本文提出一个全新的衡量期刊量效关系的指标——期刊量效指数(journal mass index,JMI).“量”指期刊的发文量,“效”则引入期刊影响因子.JMI定义为某刊影响因子与该刊影响因子对应的发文量的比值,意义是平均每篇文献对该刊影响因子的贡献值.JMI能客观反映同一个学科中量大质低的期刊的“臃肿程度”.在《中国学术期刊影响因子年报(2016版)》中,JMI被应用于修正期刊影响力指数(CI)排序,使CI排序更准确地反映学术期刊的学科影响力排名.实践证明,JMI是一个对学术期刊量效关系进行客观评判的有用的计量指标. 相似文献
17.
选取中国科技论文与引文数据库中2003—2012年的论文及引文数据,以综合大学学报类和医学综合类期刊的首篇文章为例,从单篇论文评价的角度探讨首篇文章(同行评议质量较高)与同期的总体论文、高h指数论文、高被引论文之间的关系。结果发现:相比同期的其他论文,期刊的首篇文章具有更高的影响力,论文的h指数均值及篇均被引都高于前者;期刊的首篇论文中,38%同时为当期论文中的h指数最高论文,10%为当期论文中的被引频次最高论文,定量评价的高质量论文与同行评议的高品质论文——首篇文章,具有较好的重合度。值得注意的是,这种重合度随着时间的推移在不断增长。 相似文献
18.
中文医学学术期刊发表英文文章的实践与思考 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
中文医学学术期刊发表英文文章的现象较为普遍.通过对发表在<吉林大学学报(医学版)>上的112篇英文文章的发表时间、栏目、作者分布及被引用情况和其他3种较权威医学学术期刊发表的英文文章的数量及被引用情况进行分析,发现中文期刊发表的英文文章虽然具有较高的学术价值,但被国内期刊引用率明显低于同期发表的中文文章,SCI-E检索显示被引频次为0,认为中文医学学术期刊发表英文文章并没有起到扩大传播范围、促进期刊国际化的作用,而且浪费宝贵的信息资源.建议中文医学学术期刊不宜刊发英文文章,在国内应首选英文版期刊发表英文文章. 相似文献
19.
Faramarz Soheili Ali Akbar Khasseh Afshin Mousavi Chelak Mohammad Tavakolizadeh‐Ravari 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(2):121-129
Influence and capital are two concepts used to evaluate scholarly outputs, and these can be measured using the Scholarly Capital Model as a modelling tool. The tool looks at the concepts of connectedness, venue representation, and ideational influence using centrality measures within a social network. This research used co‐authorships and h‐indices to investigate authors who have published papers in the field of information behaviour between 1980 and 2015 as extracted from Web of Science. The findings show a relationship between the authors’ connectedness and the venue (journal) representation. It could be seen that the venue (journal) influences the chance of citation, and equally, the prestige (centrality) of authors probably raises the citations of the journals. The research also shows a significant positive relationship between the venue representation and ideational influence. This means that a research work that is published in a highly cited journal will find more visibility and will receive more citations. 相似文献
20.
The Web impact of open access social science research 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
For a long time, Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) journal citations have been widely used for research performance monitoring of the sciences. For the social sciences, however, the Social Sciences Citation Index® (SSCI®) can sometimes be insufficient. Broader types of publications (e.g., books and non-ISI journals) and informal scholarly indicators may also be needed. This article investigates whether the Web can help to fill this gap. The authors analyzed 1530 citations from Google™ to 492 research articles from 44 open access social science journals. The articles were published in 2001 in the fields of education, psychology, sociology, and economics. About 19% of the Web citations represented formal impact equivalent to journal citations, and 11% were more informal indicators of impact. The average was about 3 formal and 2 informal impact citations per article. Although the proportions of formal and informal online impact were similar in sociology, psychology, and education, economics showed six times more formal impact than informal impact. The results suggest that new types of citation information and informal scholarly indictors could be extracted from the Web for the social sciences. Since these form only a small proportion of the Web citations, however, Web citation counts should first be processed to remove irrelevant citations. This can be a time-consuming process unless automated. 相似文献