Comparison of Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Metrics, and SCImago Journal Rank Indicator and h-index for Neurosurgical and Spinal Surgical Journals

Study Characteristics and Impact of the "Best Papers" Presented at ASSH Annual Meetings Over the Past Decade

Purpose

Each year, the American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) selects several abstracts for podium presentations during a "Best Papers" session. We examined these papers to better understand their characteristics and impact on the field of hand surgery.

Methods

"Best Papers" from the 2010 to 2020 ASSH Annual Meetings were reviewed. Online databases were searched to find matching publications. Descriptive data were collected from the publications. The Hirsch index value for each corresponding author and the number of citations for each publication were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data.

Results

Fifty-nine "Best Papers" were awarded during the study period. Forty-nine (83%) were clinical and 10 were basic science studies. A total of 39 observational studies, 11 human trials, 8 experimental studies, and 1 case series were present. Fifty-four (91.5%) were published at the time of our review. Twenty-six of those (48%) were multicenter studies, and the remaining 28 were from a single institution. The average time from presentation to publication was 16 months. The top three journals of publication were the Journal of Hand Surgery (33%), the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (9%), and the Journal of Hand Surgery, European (7%). The median level of evidence for all "Best Papers" was 3, with a trend toward a higher level of evidence during the study period. The average h-index value of all corresponding authors was 27.3. The average number of citations per publication was 37.

Conclusions

The ASSH "Best Papers" were primarily clinical studies with an increasingly strong level of evidence and were likely led by an author with a history of research productivity. Selection as a "Best Paper" at ASSH Annual Meetings is a strong predictor of future publication and impact.

Clinical relevance

This study evaluates the "value" of the best paper designation at the ASSH annual meeting.

Current situation and publication trends of skeletal muscle related research: A bibliometric analysis

Skeletal muscle (SM) is a highly plastic and dynamic tissue of the body and is largely responsible for body maintenance. SM is primarily responsible for body balance, movement, postural support, thermogenesis, and blood glucose homeostasis. SM regeneration depends on the activation of muscle satellite (stem) cells (MSCs) under the regulation of several muscle regulatory factors that regulate myogenesis. Bibliometric analysis involves the quantitative and qualitative assessments of research and scientific progress that provides researchers access to recent publications, research directions, and thus generates ideas that can be implemented to guide future research. In this analysis, the Web of Science database was searched for articles using the search term "skeletal muscle AND myogenesis AND muscle satellite cell", and 1777 articles (original research/review articles) published from the year 1997 to June 2023 were retrieved. After applying several other exclusion and inclusion criteria, 129 articles were considered for analysis. Types of research, keywords, journals, authors, years, institutions, funding agencies, and average annual citations were analyzed. Muscle regeneration, satellite cell, and myogenesis were often used keywords and exhibited increasing trends in research articles over the decades. Some journals were found to strongly support research publications with high impact factors and citation scores. This study aimed to examine research ideas and growth in the skeletal muscle related field for atrophy and aging improvement.

Journal metrics of the top-ranked Orthopaedic, Medical, and Surgical journals - A cross-sectional, comparative study

PURPOSE

In academic publishing, research metrics play a crucial role in assessing the scientific impact and performance of the published literature, as well as of the journals in which they are published. Several journal-level metrics (JLM) such as the h-index of the analysed journals, total citations, total documents, citable documents, references and external citations per document are considered crucial indicators of the importance and reputation of the journals. We hypothesize that journals in the field of Medicine receive more citations than those in Surgical journals like Orthopaedic surgery, and hence have better JLM. This study aims to to assess and compare the JLM of Medical and Surgical journals between two time zones 2017-2019 vs. 2020-2022, i.e., pre and post-COVID-19 pandemic period.

METHODS

A cross-sectional bibliometric analysis of the top-ranked Orthopaedic, Medical, and Surgical journals was undertaken based on traditional JLM, using the SCImago database from 2017 to 2022. Our analysis focused on identifying trends in the h-index of the analysed journals, total citations, total documents, citable documents, references and external citations per document.

RESULTS

Overall Medical journals were found to have higher JLM than the Surgical and Orthopaedic journals. The h-index of Surgical journals, Medical journals and Orthopaedic journals were comparable between the two periods (pre and -post-COVID-19 pandemic); Total Cites (3 years), total documents (2017), total documents (3 years), total references, and citable documents (3 years) of Surgical journals, Medical journals and Orthopaedic journals were significantly higher in the period 2020-2022.

CONCLUSION

There has been a steady increase in the number of publications from post COVID-19 period. Medical journals have higher JLM than Surgical and Orthopaedic journals. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (Am), Annals of Surgery and Diabetes Care were the most published journals in Orthopaedics, General Surgery and Medicine-related topics respectively.

Bibliometric evaluation of Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia (2013-2022)

The Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia, published since 1925, is the most influential dermatological journal in Latin America, indexed in the main international bibliographic databases, and occupies the 50th position among the 70 dermatological journals indexed in the Journal of Citations Reports, in 2022. In this article, the authors present a critical analysis of its trajectory in the last decade and compare its main bibliometric indices with Brazilian medical and international dermatological journals. The journal showed consistent growth in different bibliometric indices, which indicates a successful editorial policy and greater visibility in the international scientific community, attracting foreign authors. The increases in citations received (4.1×) and in the Article Influence Score (2.9×) were more prominent than those of the main Brazilian medical and international dermatological journals. The success of Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia in the international scientific scenario depends on an assertive editorial policy, on promptly publication of high-quality articles, and on institutional stimulus to encourage clinical research in dermatology.

Novel Journal Metrics in Cardiothoracic Surgery: How Different Are Contemporary Metrics From the Impact Factor?

OBJECTIVE

Despite shortcomings, impact factor (IF) remains the "gold standard" metric for journal quality. However, novel metrics including the h-index, g-index, and Altmetric Attention Score (AAS; mentions in mainstream/social media) are gaining traction. We assessed correlations between these metrics among cardiothoracic surgery journals.

METHODS

For all cardiothoracic surgery journals with a 2021 Clarivate IF (N = 20), the 2-year IF (2019 to 2020) and 5-year IF (2016 to 2020), h-index, and g-index were obtained. Two-year journal-level AAS (2019 to 2020) was also calculated. Journal Twitter presence and activity was sourced from Twitter and the Twitter application programming interface. Correlations were assessed using Spearman correlation, and coefficients of determination were calculated.

RESULTS

IF demonstrated a moderate-strong positive correlation with the h-index (rs = 0.48 to 0.77) and g-index (rs = 0.49 to 0.79) and a moderate correlation with AAS (rs = 0.53 to 0.58). The 2-year IF accounted for 25% to 49% of variability in the h-index, 27% to 55% of variability in the g-index, and 32% of variability in the AAS. Among journals with a Twitter account (N = 10), IF was strongly correlated with Twitter following (rs = 0.81 to 0.86), which was in turn strongly correlated with journal AAS (rs = 0.79). Article-level AAS was moderately correlated with citation count (rs = 0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

IF accounted for only between 25% and 55% of variability in the h-index and g-index, indicating that these newer metrics measure unique dimensions of citation-based impact. Thus, the academic community must familiarize itself with these newer journal metrics. Social media attention may be associated with scholarly impact, although further work is needed to understand these relationships.

Should the Eigenfactor Replace the Impact Factor?: A Bibliometric Study of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Aesthetic Surgery Journals

BACKGROUND

Despite the global acceptance of the impact factor (IF) by researchers and academic institutions as one, criticism has been voiced regarding its effectiveness in evaluating the unbiased impact of a journal. To overcome the limitations and drawbacks of the IF that were presented by the scientific community, they introduced several other citation-based bibliometric indices.

METHODS

All plastic and reconstructive surgery journals were analyzed, and bibliometric indices were extracted from the relevant source. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to determine correlations between the various indices.

RESULTS

All correlations in between the various bibliometric indices were found to be positively and statistically significant, ranging from moderately highly associated for the IF and Eigenfactor (r = 0.632) to very strongly associated (r = 0.962) for the IF and the Article Influence Score.

CONCLUSION

In the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery, the Eigenfactor and its derivative, the Article Influence Score, could potentially serve as better indices than the IF in demonstrating the overall picture. This information is based on the inclusion of a greater number of journals in the calculation and subtraction of self-citations, without compromising their correlation with other indices.The use of Eigenfactor and other additional bibliometrics cooperatively with the IF could provide the most extensive evaluation of a journal's scientific impact.

Modern Impact of Surgery Journals: Associations Between Impact Factor, H5-Index, and Altmetric Score

INTRODUCTION

While impact factor (IF) remains the "gold standard" metric for journal quality, newer metrics are gaining popularity. These include the H5-index and journal Altmetric Attention Score (AAS). We explored the relationship between the IF, H5-index, and AAS for core general surgery (GS) and subspecialty journals.

METHODS

For all GS and subspecialty journals with a Clarivate IF, H5-index (January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021) and journal AAS were obtained. Journal Twitter presence and activity was sourced from Twitter and the Twitter application programming interface. Spearman's correlations were assessed for numeric variables.

RESULTS

A total of 105 journals were included, around half (49/105; 46.7%) of which were core GS journals. Median IF was 2.48 and median H5-index 19. Journal IF demonstrated a strong correlation with H5-index overall (r = 0.81), though this ranged from r = 0.95 (P < 0.01) for vascular surgery to r = 0.77 (P < 0.01) for plastic surgery journals. AAS was moderately correlated with the IF and H5-index (r = 0.59 and 0.62, respectively; both P < 0.01). R² values ranging indicated that 66% of the variation in the H5-index and 35% of the variation in AAS was explained by the IF. Just over half the journals had a Twitter account (54/105; 51.4%). Journals with a Twitter account also had a significantly higher IF, H5-index, and AAS than those without a Twitter account (all P < 0.01). AAS was moderately correlated with Twitter activity (r = 0.59) and Twitter followers (r = 0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Across GS and subspecialty journals, journal IF correlates strongly with the H5-index and moderately with AAS. However, only 35% of variation in AAS and 66% of variation in the H5-index is explained by the IF, indicating that these metrics measure unique aspects of journal quality. The future growth of surgical journals should be geared towards improving across multiple metrics, including both the conventional and the contemporary, while leveraging social media to improve readership and eventual academic impact.

h-Index, Journal Citation Indicator, and Other Impact Factors in Neurosurgical Publications: Is There a Cost Factor That Determines the Quality?

OBJECTIVE

There has been an increase in number of Neurosurgical publications, including open access (OA), in recent years. We aimed to compare journals' performance and the relationship to submission fees incurred in publication.

METHODS

We identified 53 journals issuing neurosurgery-related work. Quantitative analysis from various search engines involved obtaining h-index, Journal Citation Indicator (JCI), and other metrics such as Immediacy Index and 5-year impact factor utilising Journal Citation Reports. OA fees and individual subscription fees were collected. Correlations were produced using Spearman rho (ρ) (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Median h-index for 53 journals was 54 (range: 0-292), with JCI median reported as 0.785 (range: 0-2.45). Median Immediacy Index was 0.797 (range: 0-4.076), and median for 5-year impact factor was 2.76 (range: 0-12.704). There was a very strong positive correlation between JCI and Immediacy Index, JCI and 5-year impact factor, and 5-year impact factor and Immediacy Index (ρ > 0.7, P < 0.05). It is unclear whether there was any correlation between the indices and the OA costs and subscription costs for personal usage (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Larger costs incurred for OA fees and subscription costs for personal use do not clearly reflect on the journals' performance, as quantified by using various indices. There appears to be a strong association with performance across the journals' metrics. It would be beneficial to include learning about bibliometric indices' impact for research publications in medical education training to maximize the quality of the scientific work produced and increase the visibility of the information produced. The potential full movement to exclusively OA journals would create a significant barrier for junior researchers, small institutions, and full time-trainee physicians with limited funding available. This study suggests the need for a robust measurement of journals' output and the quality of the work produced.

Do open-access dermatology articles have higher citation counts than those with subscription-based access?

BACKGROUND

Open-access (OA) publishing is increasingly prevalent in dermatology, and many journals now offer hybrid options, including conventional (subscription-based access [SA]) publishing or OA (with an author publishing charge) in a subscription journal. OA publishing has been noted in many disciplines, but this has been rarely studied in dermatology.

METHODS

Using the Clarivate Journal Citation Report, we compiled a list of English-language dermatology hybrid OA journals containing more than 5% OA articles. We sampled any OA review or original research article in 4 issues from 2018 to 2019 and matched an equal number of SA articles. Citation count, citation count excluding self-citations and view counts found using Scopus and Altmetrics score were recorded for each article. Statistical analyses were performed using logistic and negative binomial models using R software.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven hybrid dermatology journals were found, and 538 articles were sampled (269 OA, 269 SA). For both original research and review articles, OA articles had significantly higher mean citation counts (mean 13.2, standard deviation [SD] 17.0) compared to SA articles (mean 7.9, SD 8.8) (odds ratio [OR] 1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.05; P < .001) including when adjusted for time from publication. Original research OA articles had significantly higher citation counts than original research SA articles (excluding self-citations; OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05; P = .003), and review articles also had OA citation advantage than review SA articles (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.11; P = .008). There was, however, no significant difference in citation counts between review articles and original research articles (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.19-5.31; P = 1.000). There was no significant difference seen in view counts (OA: mean±SD 17.7±10.8; SA: mean±SD 17.1±12.4) and Altmetric score (OA: mean±SD 13.2±47.8; SA: mean±SD 6.3±25.0) between OA and SA articles. Potential confounders included the fact that more OA articles were published in Europe than in Asia, and pharmaceutical-funded articles were more likely to be published OA.

CONCLUSIONS

We noted a higher citation count for OA articles than SA articles in dermatology hybrid journals. However, dermatology researchers should take into account confounding factors when deciding whether to increase the impact of their work by selecting OA over SA publishing.

Bibliometric analysis of research on Alzheimer’s disease and non-coding RNAs: Opportunities and challenges

Background

Non-coding RNAs (ncRNA) are a kind of RNA that does not encode protein, which play an important role in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, there is a lack of bibliometric analysis and visualization analysis of the research related to AD and ncRNAs.

Materials and methods

Literature related to AD and ncRNAs in the last decade were searched through the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC). The relevant information from all the searched articles was collected. The bibliometric visualization website, CiteSpace, and VOSviewer were used for visualization analysis of countries/regions, institutions, authors, and keywords.

Results

In total, 1,613 kinds of literature were published in the field. Literature in this field were published in 494 journals. The Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease was the most popular journal. China, Louisiana State University System, and Lukiw WJ were the countries/regions, institutions, and authors with the highest scientific productivity, respectively. The research hotspots in this field focused on the role and mechanism of ncRNAs, especially microRNAs, in AD. The level of research was mainly based on basic research, focusing on animal and cellular levels, and related to proteomics. “Circular RNAs,” “regulation of neuroinflammation,” and “tau protein” were the future research directions.

Conclusion

Taken together, the field of AD and ncRNAs is developing well. The research hotspots and frontiers in this field can provide a reference for researchers to choose their research direction.

Bibliometric Analysis of Mexican Publications on Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery From 1949 to 2021

Background

Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery (SFN) is a rapidly evolving field and some emerging countries, especially Mexico, have made significant contributions to this discipline. A bibliometric analysis has never been performed in Latin America, and this would be particularly important to show the areas that remain poorly studied, and design research strategies for the future.

Methods

Scopus was queried using keywords pertaining to functional neurosurgery, restricting the affiliation country to Mexico, and considering documents published after 1949. Added to the initial search, a complementary literature exploration by author, considering the publications of the most productive neurosurgeons, was performed. A descriptive statistical analysis was carried out.

Results

From 5,109 articles, only 371 were eligible. Scientific production has gradually increased with time. Epilepsy (31%) and movement disorders (27.4%) were the most studied neurological conditions, whereas the other 41.6% corresponded to pain, behavior disorders, spinal cord injuries, neuromodulation, stereotactic biopsies, and SFN history. Level of evidence was predominantly level V (59.1%). Publication output is highly skewed to Mexico City, which represents 78.4% of national production. Relative to factors associated with impact of research, publications in English had more citations (28.5 mean citations per paper), and journals with an impact factor greater than one had more than 10 mean citations per paper.

Conclusions

Mexico has experienced an increase in the productivity of SFN literature, addressing the most prevalent issues in the country (epilepsy and motor disorders). However, it is necessary to report studies with a higher level of evidence, as well as to decentralize the research collaborating with national institutions outside Mexico City. On the other hand, it is imperative to promote scientific production in English and in high-impact indexed journals to increase the visibility of our production. We would like to call upon our colleagues in other countries to reproduce our methodology, in order to determine the factors associated with the impact and productivity on SFN research.

The Upsurge of Impact Factors in Pediatric Journals Post COVID-19 Outbreak: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background

Impact factor (IF) is a quantitative tool designed to evaluate scientific journals' excellence. There was an unprecedented upsurge in biomedical journals' IF in 2020, perhaps contributed by the increased number of publications since the COVID-19 outbreak. We conducted a cross-sectional study (2018–2020) to analyze recent trends in standard bibliometrics (IF, Eigenfactor, SNIP) of pediatric journals. We also estimated reference and publication counts of biomedical journals since publication volume determines the number of citations offered and IF.

Methods

Various bibliometrics of pediatric journals and reference/publication volumes of biomedical journals were compared between 2020 vs. 2019 and 2019 vs. 2018. We also compared open access (OA) and subscription journals' trends. Finally, we estimated IF changes in the journals of a different specialty, pulmonology.

Results

The study included 164 pediatric and 4,918 biomedical journals (OA = 1,473, subscription = 3,445). Pediatric journals' IFs had increased significantly in 2020 [median (IQR) = 2.35 (1.34)] vs. 2019 [1.82 (1.22)] (Wilcoxon: p-value < 0.001). IFs were unchanged between 2018 and 2019. Eigenfactor remained stable between 2018 and 2020, while SNIP increased progressively. Reference/publication volumes of biomedical journals escalated between 2018 and 2020, and OA journals experienced faster growth than subscription journals. IFs of pulmonary journals also increased considerably in 2020 vs. 2019.

Conclusions

We report an upsurge in pediatric journals' IF, perhaps contributed by a sudden increase in publication numbers in 2020. Therefore, considering this limitation, IF should be cautiously used as the benchmark of excellence. Unlike IF, Eigenfactor remained stable between 2018 and 2020. Similar changes in IF were also observed among the journals of another specialty, pulmonology.

Clarivate listed nursing journals in 2020: what they publish and how they measure use of social media

Objectives

To investigate what the most common types of articles that nursing journals purport to publish are and what they actually publish. And to investigate the extent to which academic nursing journals listed by Clarivate track alternative metrics.

Methods

Journals included in the nursing Journal Citation Report (JCR) journal category in 2019 described as nursing were identified and considered suitable for inclusion in the analysis. Instructions for authors were reviewed online and mention of each type of article is identified. The tables of contents of each issue of each journal published during 2019 were examined and the types of articles published were extracted to a spreadsheet into permitted article types and published articles. Likewise, the use of alternative metrics by each journal was extracted to a spreadsheet. Pearson's and Spearman's correlation analysis was applied to investigate the relationship between articles permitted and articles published.

Results

In the 2020 JCR, 123 journals were listed. The most common article type permitted was original research (n = 117), followed by review papers (n = 116), and discussion papers (n = 63). Original research (n = 7045); review papers (n = 1268); discussion papers (n = 1225); editorials (n = 793) and commentaries (n = 776) were the most commonly published categories of the article. Of journals examined, 108 (96.8%) tracked mentions on social media and the Altmetric score was most commonly used (75%). There was a strong correlation (r = 0.73; P = 0.002) between the numbers of articles permitted and published and a strong correlation (ρ = 0.86; P < 0.001) in terms of the rankings of the permitted and published articles.

Conclusions

There is a relationship between the most frequently permitted article types and those published, especially for the most frequent categories of both. Original articles, review papers, and discussion papers are the backbone of academic publishing in nursing with original articles vastly outweighing review and discussion papers. Most Clarivate listed journals now use some method of tracking alternative metrics indicating how seriously publishers take their social media profiles.

Reporting Policies in Neurosurgical Journals: A Meta-Science Study of the Current State and Case for Standardization

BACKGROUND

Reporting quality within the neurosurgical literature is low, limiting the ability of journals to act as gatekeepers for evidence-based neurosurgical care. Journal policies during article submission aim to improve reporting quality. We conducted a meta-science study characterizing the reporting policies of neurosurgical journals and other related peer-reviewed publications.

METHODS

Journals were retrieved in 7 searches using Journal Citation Reports and Google Scholar. Characteristics, impact metrics, and submission policies were extracted.

RESULTS

Of 486 results, 54 journals were included, including 27 neurosurgical and 27 related topical journals. Thirty-eight (70.4%) adopted authorship guidelines and 20 (37.0%) disclosure standards of the International Council of Medical Journal Editors. Twenty-six (48.1%) required data availability statement and 33 (61.1%) clinical trials registration. Twenty-one (38.9%) required and 11 (20.4%) recommended adherence to reporting guidelines. Twenty (37.0%) endorsed EQUATOR network guidelines. PRISMA was mentioned by 30 (55.6%) journals, CONSORT by 28 (51.9%), and STROBE by 18 (33.3%). Among neurosurgical journals, factors associated with a requirement or recommendation to follow reporting guidelines among neurosurgical journals included impact factor (P = 0.0013), Article Influence Score (P = 0.0236), SCImago h-index (P = 0.0152), SCImago journal rank (P = 0.002), and CiteScore (P = 0.0023), as well as recommendations pertaining to International Council of Medical Journal Editors authorship guidelines (P = 0.0085), ORCID (P = 0.014), clinical trials registration (P = 0.0369), or data availability statement (P = 0.0047). CONSORT, PRISMA, or STROBE delineations were significantly associated with the mention of another guideline (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Neurosurgical journal submission policies are inconsistent. Frameworks to improve reporting quality are uncommonly used. Increasing rigor and standardization of reporting policies across journals publishers may improve quality.

Factors Affecting the Time to Publication in Ophthalmology Journals: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis

Purpose: There are currently no available aids for authors when selecting ophthalmology journals to submit their manuscripts. We aim to provide comprehensive data on the duration from submission to various stages of the publication process and assess factors influencing time to publication in ophthalmology journals.Methods: A list of ophthalmology journals was obtained from the 2019 Web of Science Journal Citation Report. Journal characteristics, such as five-year impact factor, number of authors per article, journal type, and number of multi-institutional articles, were collected. The dates of submission, acceptance, electronic and print publication for all articles published in an ophthalmology journal in 2019 were determined.Results: In total, 56 journals and 8835 research articles were included. Of these articles, 3591 (40.6%) were open access and 4837 (54.7%) were multi-institutional. In 2019, most publications came from the United States of America (n = 1973), China (n = 1069) and Germany (n = 602). Significant associations were found between various predictors and a reduced mean number of days from submission to electronic publication: increased journal five-year impact factor (p = .026), more authors (p = .028), publishing in a hybrid journal (both open-access and subscription articles) versus an open-access journal (p = .021), and a reduced proportion of multi-institutional articles in a journal (p = .030).Conclusions: There is a wide variation in the time to acceptance and publication in ophthalmology journals. Authors can expect a shorter time to publication when publishing in high-impact journals.

Practical publication metrics for academics

Research organizations are becoming more reliant on quantitative approaches to determine how to recruit and promote researchers, allocate funding, and evaluate the impact of prior allocations. Many of these quantitative metrics are based on research publications. Publication metrics are not only important for individual careers, but also affect the progress of science as a whole via their role in the funding award process. Understanding the origin and intended use of popular publication metrics can inform an evaluative strategy that balances the usefulness of publication metrics with the limitations of what they can convey about the productivity and quality of an author, a publication, or a journal. This paper serves as a brief introduction to citation networks like Google Scholar, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, Microsoft Academic, and Dimensions. It also explains two of the most popular publication metrics: the h-index and the journal impact factor. The purpose of this paper is to provide practical information on using citation networks to generate publication metrics, and to discuss ideas for contextualizing and juxtaposing metrics, in order to help researchers in translational science and other disciplines document their impact in as favorable a light as may be justified.

Trends of the main bibliometric indicators of Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia (2010-2019)

BACKGROUND

The Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia (Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia) is the official journal of the Brazilian Society of Dermatology, which has been published since 1925, with free, bilingual access. There are several bibliometric indicators that estimate aspects of a journal's scientific influence. Its analysis, based especially on the evolutionary trend, allows identifying the journal's strengths and weaknesses, in addition to guiding editorial policies.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the trends of the main bibliometric indicators of Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia, in the decade of 2010-2019.

METHODS

Methodological study that proposed the analysis of bibliometric indicators published by Journal Citation Reports, SCImago, and Scopus, for the journal Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia, from 2010 to 2019. The following aspects were evaluated: Impact factor, Immediacy index, SJR (SCImago), in addition to the number of citations, citable items, Cite Score, percentage of external citations, percentage of cited articles, percentage of citable articles, and the article influence score.

RESULTS

There was an increase in the main bibliometric indicators in the last decade: impact factor (0.337 to 1.121), immediacy index (0.054 to 0.204),Eigenfactor (0.00025 to 0.00394), SJR (0.176 to 0.453). The percentage of external citations (48.4% to 94.1%) and cited articles (24.7% to 51.4%) also increased. The increase in the impact factors of Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia in the period was more significant than that of the dermatology journals (1,667 to 2,118) and the Brazilian journals (1,247 to 1,408), indexed in the Journal Citation Reports.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

Failure in the classification and registration of the databases.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been a consistent increase in the scientific influence of Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia in the last decade.

Research Trends on the Rotator Cuff Tendon: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Past 2 Decades

Background:

Clinical research on the rotator cuff tendon is increasing, and new approaches are being applied to rotator cuff disease. Considering the integration of research resources and research trends, it is necessary to conduct an analysis of recent research on the topic.

Purpose:

To identity the research trends, influential journals, key researchers, and core countries of rotator cuff tendon research between 2000 and 2019.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study.

Methods:

All the literature related to rotator cuff tendon research was retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection on January 7, 2020. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were processed based on Web of Science and CiteSpace.

Results:

A total of 4131 studies, which included 3830 articles and 301 reviews, were obtained. There was an upward trend of studies on the topic, with small fluctuations in the past 2 decades. The United States had the most studies, and the number of studies from other countries increased over the study period. Most of the funding sources came from the United States. Articles in the Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery had the most citations for rotator cuff research. Frontier topics, such as arthroscopic repair, mesenchymal stem cell, and “platelet-rich plasma, were identified. The number of citations in 2018 (r = 0.280; P = .005) and 2019 (r = 0.307; P = .002) had a weak positive correlation with publication date, indicating that the more recently published articles had a higher number of citations.

Conclusion:

Valuable information on rotator cuff research based on bibliometric analysis was identified. Arthroscopic repair, mesenchymal stem cell, and platelet-rich plasma might be the research frontiers in this field, and researchers should focus on these topics in future studies.

Bibliometric analysis of case report citations and their effect on the impact factor: How does publishing case reports impact journals?

INTRODUCTION

Given their low citation rate, case reports may reduce a journal's impact factor (IF), making a journal less likely to accept them for publication. However, this concept has never been proven in a bibliometric study. This led us to carry out a bibliometric analysis to evaluate (1) the exact number of case reports published in orthopedics over a 2-year period, (2) their citation rate, (3) what the journals' IF would be if they had not published these case reports.

HYPOTHESIS

Publishing case reports reduces a journal's IF, bringing into question whether they should be published.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective bibliometric study. We focused on all the articles influencing the year 2017. We looked at all the journals in the "Orthopedics" discipline that had published at least one article in the years n-2 (=2015) or n-1 (=2016).

RESULTS

There were 1925 case reports among the 28,903 articles published in all orthopedics journals in 2015-2016, a 6.7% share of publications. Individually, each case report in 2015-2016 was cited an average of 0.86 times±1.4 [0-13] in 2017. Of all the case reports published in 2015-2016, 571 (30%) had not been cited in 2017. When comparing the individual number of each case report citation to the journal's IF, we found 413 instances (21.5%) where the case report was cited more than expected and 1512 (78.5%) where it was cited less than expected based on the journal's IF. The mean IF was 2.013. If the journals had not published any case reports, the mean IF would have been 2.072 (p<0.0001). For all the SIGAPS categories, the mean IF would have been higher if no case reports had been published. On average, the IF was lower by 0.059 points±0.121 [-0.165-0.537], with the difference being statistically significantly only for SIGAPS C and D journals. In 69 instances, the IF would be higher if the journal had not published any case reports. Conversely, the IF improved in 8 instances by publishing case reports: 3 were tier D journals and 5 were tier E journals.

DISCUSSION

Our study brings into question whether case reports should be published. Indeed, the publication of case reports lowers the IF of scientific journals. However, we should not completely stop publishing case reports since they can be useful to clinicians caring for patients with rare diseases or medical conditions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, systematic retrospective study.

Detecting Weak Signals of the Future: A System Implementation Based on Text Mining and Natural Language Processing

Organizations, companies and start-ups need to cope with constant changes on the market which are difficult to predict. Therefore, the development of new systems to detect significant future changes is vital to make correct decisions in an organization and to discover new opportunities. A system based on business intelligence techniques is proposed to detect weak signals, that are related to future transcendental changes. While most known solutions are based on the use of structured data, the proposed system quantitatively detects these signals using heterogeneous and unstructured information from scientific, journalistic and social sources, applying text mining to analyze the documents and natural language processing to extract accurate results. The main contributions are that the system has been designed for any field, using different input datasets of documents, and with an automatic classification of categories for the detected keywords. In this research paper, results from the future of remote sensors are presented. Remote sensing services are providing new applications in observation and analysis of information remotely. This market is projected to witness a significant growth due to the increasing demand for services in commercial and defense industries. The system has obtained promising results, evaluated with two different methodologies, to help experts in the decision-making process and to discover new trends and opportunities.

Bibliometric study of traumatic brain injury rehabilitation

Purpose: This paper aims to present a bibliometric analysis of scientific documents in the field of traumatic brain injury rehabilitation.Methods: Web of Science was used to collect bibliographic data of traumatic brain injury rehabilitation documents from 1983 until the end of 2017.Results: Of a total of 6069 documents retrieved, 78.2% were journal articles. The average annual growth of the documents as of the year 2000 was 9.4%. The most frequent subject categories in this field were Rehabilitation, Neurosciences and Neurology, Sport Sciences, Psychology, and General and Internal Medicine. The most active journal was Brain Injury. More than 50% of the documents were published in 10 journals. The most prolific and impactful institutions were from the USA, Australia and Canada. Traumatic brain injury, rehabilitation, brain injury, stroke and outcome were the most commonly used keywords. Mild traumatic brain injury and concussion were the topics receiving attention in recent years.Conclusion: Traumatic brain injury rehabilitation is a young and constantly growing field. Since the late 1990s, traumatic brain injury rehabilitation documents published yearly comprised about 3-4% of all rehabilitation documents. It was shown that review papers and proceedings have more impact than journal articles, and collaborative papers receive more citations. It was also revealed that knowledge does not become obsolete rapidly in this field.

Publication integrity in orthopaedic journals: the self-citation in orthopaedic research (SCOR) threshold

BACKGROUND

The impact factor (IF) is the most commonly used bibliometric method for rating academic journals. However, the practice of journals' self-citation may artificially elevate the IF. Additional bibliometric methods including Eigenfactor scale, SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR), and corrected IF (cIF) have been created. Comparing general-interest and specialized orthopaedic journals, the aims of this study were to assess: (1) the effect of journal´s self-citation on IF; (2) differences in bibliometric analysis; and (3) to determine thresholds for monitoring self-citation practices by defining the self-citation in orthopaedic research (SCOR) Threshold.

METHODS

The journal citation reports and SCImago Journal and Country Rank databases were queried for orthopaedic journals from 1997 to 2017. The following bibliometrics were compared between general-interest and specialized journals: IF, cIF, Eigenfactor, self-citation rates, and SJR. A novel metric, the cIF ratio, was proposed to represent the relationship between a journal's IF and cIF. Thresholds for cIF were based on statistical outliers of cIF ratio within general-interest and specialized journals were calculated. Outliers were defined as data points that were greater than the third quartile by 1.5 times the interquartile range using the last 10 years studied (2007-2017).

RESULTS

Specialized orthopaedic journals had a higher median self-citation rates compared to general-interest journals (11.85% vs. 6.36%, p < 0.001). Overall, cIF ratio declined over study period, and general-interest journals had a lower cIF ratio than specialized journals (8.77% vs. 19.54%, p < 0.001). Overall, general-interest journals had more favourable values for the bibliometric indices studied compared to specialized journals The SCOR threshold for cIF ratio was determined as 25.4% for general-interest journals and 53.3% for specialized journals.

CONCLUSION

Overall, self-citation occurs at a higher rate in specialized versus general-interest orthopaedic journals. We propose the use of a cIF ratio along with the SCOR threshold as a tool to evaluate and monitor journal self-citation practices in orthopaedic research.

Contribution of Moroccan Neurosurgeons to the World Neurosurgical Data in PubMed: A Bibliometric Evaluation Over Time

BACKGROUND

Medical publications reflect the development of training, research, and health services. No objective data are available regarding neurosurgical publications from Morocco. Bibliometrics were used to evaluate the contribution of Moroccan neurosurgeons (MONSs) in neurosurgical journals worldwide and to discuss the strategies that can be applied to increase the quantity and quality of publications on this subject.

METHODS

A literature search of reports by MONSs was performed using the PubMed database. The number and quality of the reports were evaluated with the impact factor of the neurosurgical journals and the h-index of each first author.

RESULTS

The data from 174 identified studies reported from 1989 to 2018 were analyzed. MONSs have continued to report more studies every year worldwide. However, their contribution to neurosurgical journals has been gradually declining since 2012. Scientific publishing was limited to a few great neurosurgical departments and a few academic neurosurgeons in Morocco. Most of the reports were case reports, reported in the French language, included in non-neurosurgical journals, from single centers, and without international collaboration.

CONCLUSIONS

Academic neurosurgeons in Morocco should prepare their residents and young researchers on research methodology and medical writing. Moroccan neurosurgical research should be more focused on modern neurosurgical topics by highlighting our particularities. More high level of evidence studies should be reported in English-language neurosurgical journals with a high impact factor and good scientific reputation. MONSs should continue to collaborate more often with each other and with foreign centers to further improve the quality and number of international publications, regardless of the difficulties they face.